“A good science fiction story should be able to predict not the automobile but the traffic jam.” —Frederik Pohl It is very easy to imagine a future full of laser beams, force fields, and faster-than-light travel. It is much more difficult to imagine a realistic world in which those technologies exist. A spaceship traveling faster than light seems an unprecedented boon for interstellar travel. But what happens when one wacko decides to aim a rocket (of now infinite kinetic energy) toward Earth? With each technological advance comes a number of second-order effects that are increasingly difficult to predict. The job of science fiction is to extrapolate these previously unforeseeable possibilities and then explore them for all their implications. There may be a breaking point — a moment when humanity decides technology has outgrown its usefulness. Sci-fi author Frederik Pohl was visionary in his observation of the genre, but I think a better way to restate his insight would be this: “A good science fiction story should be able to predict not only a way a technology will be used but how it will be abused.” Whatever ingenious development mankind comes up with next will inevitably one day fall into the wrong hands. And, of course, that presumes human hands were ever responsible enough for the tools we have created. In the 21st century, aren’t these concerns at least a little warranted? We have the tools and the talent to deepfake Adam Sandler into Quentin Tarantino’s "Inglourious Basterds," and that video came out four years ago. Remember, this was before AI generators such as Dall-E and Midjourney were released. If these powerful image and video editors were available, then is it not probable that someone somewhere has already taken advantage? It seems shocking that there has not been a major political scandal of some sort — unless, of course, they have gotten away with it. With the power of image alteration comes the implicit inevitability that someone will alter an image — the truth — for their own gain. With the power of an FTL drive, there is the certainty that someone will turn that same ship upon a planet. And with the power of the holodeck, there is the implicit certainty that someone will take it too far. The holodeck is a recurring plot device within the long-running "Star Trek" franchise. It is a room that can manifest tactile holograms that are indistinguishable from reality. In fact, these holograms are so lifelike that there is an episode in "Star Trek: The Next Generation" in which a hologram gains full sentience as a human. The plot resolves itself the way the show often solves such complex moral quandaries: by shuffling the problem off-stage. The sentient hologram is deactivated and promptly forgotten for much of the show. Admittedly, "Star Trek: The Next Generation" did explore part of the holodeck’s ramifications in season three’s episode "Hollow Pursuits." In this episode, Reginald Barclay becomes obsessed with the holodeck’s more exotic opportunities. I’m sure one with reasonable internet experience can see where this plot leads next. Unfortunately, or perhaps thankfully, "Star Trek" doesn’t feel the need to answer the full societal ramifications of merging simulacra with reality. Barclay’s social anxieties are resolved, and the problem is treated as a singular incident rather than the monumental catastrophe of human psychology it represents. After all, if there were such a place where the internet could become as manifestly real as you or me, I’m sure it wouldn’t greatly upset the human race. But assuming for a moment that it would, what would the ramifications be? If there were a room where all of mankind’s imagination could come true in a single thought, I do have to ask one single question: Why would anyone ever leave? Real science fiction CBS Photo Archive Of course, this is hand-waved away with energy requirements or some other sci-fi jargon in the show. Perhaps spending too much time in the room exposes you to dangerous radiation. Whatever the case, "Star Trek" can have its excuses because it’s a fun sci-fi show meant to create thought-provoking commentary on improbable issues. It presents interesting hypotheticals intended to tease the mind and open up moral dilemmas. However, in exploring this particular issue more seriously, a difficult question remains to be answered. What if the holodeck were real? What if we could create all the meaningful simulacra of human existence and then plug a person into it? What if we could build that room? And more importantly, why would we not center our civilization around building every such room for every such person? If the internet — if all human desire — could be made tangible, is that not the ultimate consumer product? Would this not be sold to the entire human populace, and would our energies not be spent on making this as widely available as commercially possible? If we have at our fingertips a digital heaven, who wouldn’t reach for it? Some would argue that portions of humanity would reject this technology out of hand. After all, Hollywood tells us that the luddites will rise against Skynet and re-establish human dominance over the planet. But has this been the case in the real world? Has the long march of progress been halted by its skeptics? Or has the majority of humanity gone along quietly with innovation — whatever the cost? There may be a breaking point — a moment when humanity decides technology has outgrown its usefulness. Perhaps not. But it is doubtless that if this technology should ever come — and it should be adopted liberally — that would be the end of humanity as we know it. Each person would be trapped in a digital simulacrum, living the best lives they could imagine. To put it more accurately, the best lives could be simulated for them. We’ve already seen the effect of the digital on the human psyche. No one disputes that fertility rates are declining across the board in developed countries. The results are in. Those who embrace the material benefits of the Industrial Revolution quickly fall below replacement levels. The cold, hard truth is that we no longer possess the will to create children fast enough to replace us. And while high immigration might seem like a short-term solution (albeit with many drawbacks), it certainly doesn’t solve the longer march of progress. When we replace the real with the digital, humans become isolated from one another, eventually preferring simulacra to uncomfortable reality. For many youths today, it is easier to scroll on X or TikTok than to have a real conversation. It is easier to go to Pornhub instead of asking a girl out on a date. It is easier to swim in the internet's currents than live your real life. The questions of the digital replacing reality are not far-flung science fiction. While the holodeck might seem a pipe dream of a distant future, such technology is actively being pursued today. The holodeck is nothing more than a gimmick to merge the simulated with the real, which has been the goal of Western elites since the invention of the computer. With the recent news of Neuralink opening human tests, we are assuredly taking another small step toward that future. I am not worried about the medical breakthroughs that Neuralink or other such technologies offer. I lose no sleep at night over the lives that will be made better by such innovations and ones still to come. What else might these technologies be used for? What are the unintended and often isolating consequences? And how can — and will — these technologies be abused?

Throughout history, when food production is radically changed or when agriculture is disrupted, the results are catastrophic.Europe has been doing this ever since the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015. The United States would be exactly where Europe is now, but Donald Trump disrupted the entire shift. Today, European farmers are so fed up that they are spraying government buildings with manure in protest.Biden’s Build Back Better has not only wreaked havoc on most families across America, but it has also equated to a stealth war on American farmers.Have you heard about any of these protests in any real detail on the news? Remember the yellow vest protests? The coverage was everywhere, and it was 24/7. Why such sporadic reporting in comparison on these farmer convoys and protests?No one is asking the farmers why they’re leaving their fields to protest in the city. It gets minor mention, or you see articles like this from the Guardian, which, in the writer's “expert” opinion, claims the farmers are “being exploited by the far right.”It surely isn’t about Europe’s crazy Agenda 2030 plan. It isn’t about diesel prices blowing through the roof or fertilizer becoming more expensive and less available. Or how about the fact that government regulators are more concerned with globalist climate goals than the economic wellbeing of the people they claim to represent? That’s what happens when you are governed by unelected bureaucrats beholden only to the globalist elites. Less land, less foodThe European Commission published its plan to completely upend food production. It’s masked in words like, “to increase the resilience of agriculture and forestry against climate change.” It points out that agriculture accounts for 10% of total greenhouse gas emissions in the EU. The next line lays out its plan for a quasi-nationalization of every industry and means of production in Europe.It says farming emissions come behind energy, transportation, residential, commercial, and finally, agricultural industries. It wants direct government interference in basically every industry until there’s no private industry left. This is 21st-century fascism, and it has nothing to do with climate. This is a power play. It’s about seizing control.But the problem for these neofascists is that farmers are not the type to let anyone push them around. That’s why we’re seeing farmers protesting all over Europe right now.The EU’s agriculture climate document discusses cracking down on two major “greenhouse gasses”: methane and nitrous oxide.Methane emissions come mainly from livestock. Cutting those emissions could entail anything from culling herds to mandating different kinds of feed. This alone radically alters how much food is available, and it incurs new expenses atop already sky-high operating costs.Nitrous oxide is a major component of fertilizer. We all know where this leads: a full-on ban. Two years ago, a ban on nitrous oxide led to the absolute collapse of food production in Sri Lanka. One rice farmer told Reuters: “Last year, we got 60 bags from these two acres. But this time it was just 10.”The European Commission’s plan for farmers includes “Green Direct Payments.” These are effectively bribes for anyone who bends the knee. To get these bribes, farmers and ranchers must “maintain permanent grassland” — in other words, farm less land. That means less food.They must also “undertake crop diversification.” This is the European government telling farmers what to plant. How on earth did farmers survive thousands of years without “experts” in their government telling them how to do their job?Finally, they must “dedicate 5% of arable land to ecological focus areas.” This also means fewer crops and less food.Keep in mind, in Europe, these are not suggestions. This document describes the “monitoring process” that will be employed, and how it is all backed up on a “legal basis.”If the media bothered to ask the farmers in Europe what they’re protesting about, here is what they would tell them: These restrictions not only entail less food for the people but also the inability of farmers and ranchers to make a living for their own families.Biden wreaks havocThis has nothing to do with the climate. It’s about forcing the agriculture sector into a partnership with the government. This used to be called fascism, but now it’s just called Build Back Better, the Great Reset, or whatever else they plan to rebrand and rename it in the future.But this is not just happening in Europe. It's just further along than we are. Joe Biden has stated that farmers under his administration are “thriving,” but if you talk to any of them, they will tell a much different story.One Kansas wheat farmer told Fox News that he and his family are in “survival mode.” He cited the volatile market, out-of-control diesel costs, and the rising price of fertilizer as the main contributors to their financial woes. Sound familiar?Biden’s Build Back Better has not only wreaked havoc on most families across America, but it has also equated to a stealth war on American farmers.Since Biden became president, operating costs on farms have increased by $100 billion. The total costs for American farmers to raise crops and livestock is now at a record high of $460 billion. Who can afford that?The better question might be, Is that the actual point?They want farmers in a no-win situation where partnership with the government is the only option left. Just like the EU, Joe Biden announced a bribe method to reel in farmers and ranchers.Biden in November announced a $5 billion package for rural communities. It includes many of the same regulations pushed by the European Commission. All that’s missing is the compliance checks and legal framework for punishment, but how long before that gets added?Donald Trump halted our disastrous trajectory that Europe has already embarked on, but how long until Europe’s war on food is adapted and implemented by our own government? Do you want a government that can tell farmers what to grow and what not to grow? Do you want to be ruled by unelected bureaucrats who are more concerned with climate goals than whether the American people have enough food?These are all downstream from the Great Reset, and who you vote for in November will have major ramifications on whether they will come to fruition.Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

During the Golden Age of Piracy, thousands of sea dogs sought fame and fortune. But the reality of a pirate's life was less enticing than movies and television shows suggest

When it comes to streaming media players, there are really only three brands that are at the top of most people's lists. One is the Apple TV, but it's pretty overpriced, so it's only good if you absolutely love Apple products. The other two are Amazon's Fire TV Sticks and Roku players. When it comes to the latter, now is the perfect time to see why people love them so much. That's because my three favorite Roku player models were all just made even more attractive than they normally are. Competitive pricing is one thing that makes Roku so popular, and that's especially true right now because there's a big sale happening. Prices start at just $19 for the Roku Express, which is the company's cheapest streaming media player. If you want support for 4K resolution and other upgraded features, you can get the Roku Express 4K+ for $29 or the best-selling Roku Streaming Stick 4K for $34. There are also several smart TVs on sale this week with Roku TV software built right in. Roku Express | HD Roku Streaming Device with Standard Remote (no TV controls), Free & Live TV Price: $19 (reg. $30) You Save: $10.99 (37%) Buy Now Roku Streaming Stick 4K | Portable Roku Streaming Device 4K/HDR/Dolby Vision, Roku Voice Remote… Price: $34 (reg. $50) You Save: $15.99 (32%) Buy Now Roku Express 4K+ | Roku Streaming Device 4K/HDR, Roku Voice Remote, Free & Live TV Price: $29 (reg. $40) You Save: $10.99 (27%) Buy Now Hisense 65-Inch Class R6 Series 4K UHD Smart Roku TV with Alexa Compatibility, Dolby Vision HDR… Price: $399.99 (reg. $440) You Save: $40.00 (9%) Buy Now Personally, I use Apple TV boxes in my house. Honestly, though, I don't often recommend them when people ask me which streaming media player they should buy. I do like my Apple TVs a lot, and I'm not sad that I bought them. I'm deep in Apple's ecosystem with my iPhone, Apple Watch, iPad Pro, MacBook Air, and iMac, among other things. I like having the same UI on my TVs, and I find that Apple's TV apps are a bit more refined than they are on other platforms. Plus, it's great to be able to use the same accounts across devices. Is all that worth paying $129-$149 while other streaming media players cost a fraction of that price? For most people, it's probably not. And that's especially true right now while there's a big Roku sale happening on some of my favorite Roku player models. The Roku Express is the cheapest model that Roku makes, and it's 37% off right now at $19. The Express is great for streaming and for getting access to everything Roku offers for as little money as possible. Roku Express | HD Roku Streaming Device with Standard Remote (no TV controls), Free & Live TV Price: $19.00 You Save: $10.99 (37%) Buy Now That being said, there are a few things that people tend to complain about on the Roku Express. First, it maxes out at 1080p Full HD resolution. And second, it has a traditional box form factor instead of the dongle form factor that most people prefer. If you want to solve both of those problems, the Roku Streaming Stick 4K is on sale for $34 instead of its regular $50 price. As the name suggests, it's a streaming stick instead of a box, so you can tuck it away behind your TV. It also supports 4K resolution. Check out BGR's Roku Streaming Stick 4K review for more on this popular model. Or, if you only want 4K and you don't care about the form factor, you can save $5 and get the Roku Express 4K+ while it's on sale for $29. I do like this model a lot, but to be honest, I would recommend getting the Roku Streaming Stick 4K instead since the prices are so close right now. Roku Streaming Stick 4K | Portable Roku Streaming Device 4K/HDR/Dolby Vision, Roku Voice Remote… Price: $34 (reg. $50) You Save: $15.99 (32%) Buy Now Roku Express 4K+ | Roku Streaming Device 4K/HDR, Roku Voice Remote, Free & Live TV Price: $29 (reg. $40) You Save: $10.99 (27%) Buy Now As I mentioned earlier, several TVs with Roku's software are also on sale. Devices like the Roku Express and Roku Streaming Stick 4K are great because they can transform any TV into a Roku TV. If you're shopping for a new television anyway, however, why not cut out the middle man and get a smart TV with built-in access to everything Roku offers? Roku deals on TVs start at only $169.99 for a TCL 40-inch smart Roku TV. You can also upgrade to a Westinghouse 42-inch model for $199.99, down from the old MSRP of $230. And if you're in the market for something larger, the Hisense R6 65-inch Roku TV is on sale for $399.99, down from $440 (which, by the way, is a new MSRP that was reduced from $800). TCL 40-Inch Class S3 1080p LED Smart TV with Roku TV (40S350R, 2023 Model), Compatible with Ale… Price: $169.99 (reg. $230) You Save: $60.00 (26%) Buy Now Hisense 65-Inch Class R6 Series 4K UHD Smart Roku TV with Alexa Compatibility, Dolby Vision HDR… Price: $379.99 (reg. $622) You Save: $40.00 (9%) Buy Now Don't Miss: Today’s deals: $20 Apple AirTags, $34 Roku Streaming Stick 4K, $130 Beats Solo 3, $47 Canon printer, more The post My 3 favorite Roku players just got even better appeared first on BGR. Today's Top Deals Today’s deals: $89 Apple AirPods, $3.75 smart plugs, $89 robot vacuum, Samsung monitors, more Today’s deals: $3 Alexa smart plugs, Peloton sale, $250 HP laptop, Sony XM5 headphones, more Best Fire TV Stick deals for May 2024 Best Echo Dot deals for May 2024

Brad Knott, a candidate backed by former President Donald Trump, won the Republican primary runoff for North Carolina's 13th Congressional District on Tuesday over a rival who suspended her campaign two weeks ago in response to the endorsement.

Ukrainian presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak dismissed Russian President Vladimir Putin's comments on possible negotiations over his war in Ukraine as "hypocritical" on Wednesday.

President Joe Biden and Republican challenger Donald Trump are tied in the race to win the November presidential election, as Trump fights criminal prosecution and Biden weathers criticism over his support for Israel's war against Hamas terrorists.

Even though a spate of polls shows former President Donald Trump leading President Joe Biden in key battleground states that are expected to help decide the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, campaign experts say the surveys should be "taken with a grain of salt."

House Speaker Mike Johnson Wednesday accused President Joe Biden of "carrying water for Hamas and Iran" after the White House announced he would veto the Israel Security Assistance Support Act, which if signed into law would compel the United States to send defense weapons...

A U.S. move to raise tariffs on Chinese goods is a sign of weakness, not of strength, and shows that some in the United States may be "losing their minds," China's foreign minister said Wednesday, in unusually blunt comments.