Yes! Major League Baseball is bringing the heat with this one

arguably the most popular political figure in America today is a black woman

'How the hell did you get the upgrade?'

Paleontologists recently identified a dinosaur that is believed to have lived at least partially underground—demonstrating that dinosaurs successfully exploited every kind of habitat available to them. Fona herzogae lived 99 million years ago and possesses a skeleton that bears many hallmarks of animals that burrow. Discovered in Utah by paleontologists from North Carolina State University and […] The post A Burrowing Dinosaur? More Evidence from Utah Suggests that Some Dinos Were Happier Underground appeared first on Good News Network.

Last night at the ESPYs Awards, tennis star Serena Williams took a pointed jab at Kansas City Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker. After her sister and fellow tennis star Venus Williams said, “Go ahead and enjoy women’s sports like you would any other sports, because they are sports,” Serena Williams chimed in, “Except you, Harrison Butker. We don’t need you.” Butker attended the awards, which are hosted by ESPN. After Serena Williams’ comment, “Elementary” star Quinta Brunson added, “At all. Like, ever.” But while Butker’s remarks about the value of women who choose to be homemakers stirred plenty of controversy in the media, his view is hardly outside the mainstream. Half of women with children 18 and younger would prefer to stay home with their children than work outside the home, as I noted in this column originally published May 16. It’s the off-season, but Kansas City Chiefs star kicker Harrison Butker is playing defense now. Giving a commencement address at a Catholic college, the three-time Super Bowl champion praised his wife, Isabelle, a stay-at-home mom, and warned the women graduating of “diabolical lies” regarding whether career success would make them happier than motherhood. “All of my success is made possible because a girl I met in band class back in middle school would convert to the faith, become my wife, and embrace one of the most important titles of all: homemaker,” Butker told graduates at Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas. “She’s a primary educator to our children. She’s the one who ensures I never let football or my business become a distraction from that of a husband and father.” “I say all of this to you because I’ve seen it firsthand how much happier someone can be when they disregard the outside noise and move closer and closer to God’s will in their life,” he added. “Isabelle’s dream of having a career might not have come true. But if you ask her today if she has any regrets on her decision, she would laugh out loud without hesitation and say, ‘Heck, no.’” Cue a media meltdown more appropriate for oh, a commencement speaker suggesting that graduates pursue a career in terrorism. “Chiefs’ Harrison Butker blasted for commencement speech encouraging women to be homemakers,” blared NBC News. “Chiefs’ Harrison Butker Criticized for Graduation Speech Attacking Working Women While Quoting Taylor Swift,” wrote People. “It’s demeaning to women to imply that their choices outside of wife and motherhood pale in comparison to that of a homemaker,” former California first lady and journalist Maria Shriver posted on X. Even the NFL, apparently no longer as devoted to promoting freedom of conscience as the league was during the Colin Kaepernick kneeling era, distanced itself from Butker—who also made waves with his criticism of Pride Month, in vitro fertilization, and the “tyranny of diversity, equity, and inclusion” during his speech. “Harrison Butker gave a speech in his personal capacity,” Jonathan Beane, an NFL senior vice president and chief diversity and inclusion officer, told People. “His views are not those of the NFL as an organization. The NFL is steadfast in our commitment to inclusion, which only makes our league stronger.” View this post on Instagram A post shared by Harrison Butker (@buttkicker7) But here’s the catch: Half of women with children 18 and younger say they would like to stay at home. According to a 2019 Gallup poll, 50% of women with minor children said they would prefer to be a homemaker, while 45% said they’d prefer to work outside the home. In other words, it’s Butker, not his critics, who represent the most popular view among women with younger children. If I’m blessed with children, I honestly don’t know if I’ll continue working, whether part time or full time, or choose to stay at home. But I’m sick of this idea that it’s wrong to say that some women, and maybe even most women, would be happier staying at home with their children. Among my mom, my sister, and friends, I’ve seen many women find genuine fulfillment and joy in staying home with their children, even as they face very real sacrifices because of it. (Ask a stay-at-home mom how often she longs for adult conversation, or how she feels about the ten-thousandth time she’s dealt with a toddler meltdown.) Of course, being a stay-at-home mom—or dad—just isn’t on the table for many American families struggling to pay the bills, even on two salaries. Many great moms and dads do choose to have both parents work, and still raise wonderful kids. Today is the Feast Day of St. Gianna Molla – a woman of exceptional love & the patron saint of mothers and unborn children.Gianna’s life was a selfless testimony to what it means to be pro-life. She was a pediatrician and mother who had a great love for her patients and… pic.twitter.com/3vfKa58pzF— Lila Rose (@LilaGraceRose) April 29, 2023 I’d also point out to Butker, who powerfully spoke about his love of our shared Catholic faith during his remarks, that St. Gianna Beretta Molla, who died in 1962, was a working mom. Molla, a pediatrician who continued practicing even as she raised her children, was canonized by Pope John Paul II in 2004. When Molla was pregnant with her fourth child, doctors discovered a tumor. Despite the risk to her own health, she proceeded with the pregnancy and died a week after delivering Gianna Emanuela Molla, who became a doctor herself. Catholicism is certainly not opposed to women working. In a 1995 letter to women, John Paul II, now a saint himself, wrote: “Thank you, women who work! You are present and active in every area of life-social, economic, cultural, artistic and political.” “In this way you make an indispensable contribution to the growth of a culture which unites reason and feeling, to a model of life ever open to the sense of ‘mystery,’ to the establishment of economic and political structures ever more worthy of humanity,” John Paul II added. Ultimately, were Butker to have asked me for my advice regarding his speech, I would have recommended he honor many women’s genuine desire for both careers and to be stay-at-home moms by talking about changing the corporate culture to better accommodate women who take off years or decades to be stay-at-home moms. I would have also loved Butker to talk not just about the scourge of fatherlessness but the need for good dads who push back on bosses and corporations with excessive demands and prioritize their children over worldly success. "I want to give the most vulnerable, the unborn, a voice." – Kansas City Chiefs Kicker, Harrison ButkerIncredible pic.twitter.com/mBJrvE19tZ— Anna Lulis (@annamlulis) May 15, 2024 But Butker isn’t drawing widespread ire because of his lack of nuance. He’s drawing widespread ire because he advocated a viewpoint that goes against our elites’ mentality, because he pushed back against the worldly idea that career success is what matters most, not our relationships and time with our loved ones. He’s drawing hate because, despite women’s happiness declining over the past 50 years, corporate America doesn’t want to hear that many moms would be happier if they could stay at home with their kids, or if their jobs were more accommodating to prioritizing family. He’s drawing criticism because, at a time when we urge our kids to pursue personal goals and success, he’s saying that it’s Jesus Christ who is the king, that sometimes the path of sacrifice and little to no recognition is the better one. That’s not a popular message in 2024 (nor was it in 33 A.D., for that matter). But it’s a message that deserves a serious hearing. We are not living in some era where men and women are fulfilled and happy, and children are thriving. We’re instead living in a time where violence is increasing, where mental health is in decline, where suicide rates are going up, and where addiction—whether to marijuana, harder drugs, food, porn, or alcohol—is affecting far too many. Maybe, just maybe, that’s a sign we’re not OK in our current way of life. I don’t agree with every word Butker said in his speech. But he’s sure making the right enemies—and he deserves a serious response, not censorship and unthinking criticism. The post Serena Williams’ Jab at Harrison Butker Overlooks What Many Women Actually Want appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Based on all the accusations being hurled back and forth over the past eight years, if there’s one thing everyday Americans agree on, it’s the importance of maintaining faith in our elections. Electoral integrity is a foundational block in our republic’s Jenga tower that, if pulled away, will topple it. Unfortunately, that may be just what a small but dangerous number of Americans are hoping for. The good news is most voters across the political spectrum want to preserve free and fair elections. Though we may disagree about the best way to ensure election integrity, the majority of us believe it should be easy to vote and hard to cheat and that voter fraud should be pursued and prosecuted. Unfortunately, research by Scott Rasmussen reveals that 7% of the American electorate would rather cheat than lose an election. That’s quite an alarming admission from what amounts to more than 11 million people. Worse, among the people Rasmussen calls the “politically active elite 1%” (high-income, urban professionals with postgraduate degrees), more than two-thirds would be willing to compromise their integrity to assure victory. The most charitable way to understand these people is that they believe the alternative to their preferred candidate winning is the downfall of America (“our democracy,” as they often erroneously refer to it). That’s why they favor the blanket-mailing of ballots despite the fact that, according to the Public Interest Legal Foundation, America’s voter rolls include hundreds of thousands of deceased people (many of whom have apparently voted while dead) and tens of thousands who have voted more than once in the same election. That, along with the deceptive “there’s nothing to see here” assurances of the progressive media-industrial complex and the Left’s “creative” ballot application and harvesting operations, puts the onus on the rest of us to keep a watchful eye out for shenanigans, so we can have faith in the results of not only this election but future elections. Will 7% of the electorate actually look for ways to cheat? Certainly not. But human nature being what it is, and The Heritage Foundation’s Voter Fraud Database tracking what it has (a sampling of over 1,500 cases of proven fraud), it would be naïve to expect that none of them will attempt to put their finger on the scale. But there’s a danger even more grave rooted in the fact that a lack of integrity in one election compromises faith in all elections. Most of the elite 1% are too blinded by irrational fear to connect those dots, but that’s just the outcome in which more than 2 million Americans who have adopted Marxism as their primary worldview would take glee. The Soviet Union ended up on the ash heap of history, but the Marxist dialectic of oppressor vs. oppressed has not. The mistake communists made in the 20th century is believing that economic class could be used to divide America, neglecting the tremendous economic mobility of our country. The mistake the rest of us are making in the 21st century is failing to recognize that Marxists long ago began seeking other ways to divide us. In his infamous manifesto, Karl Marx said that communists “openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions.” Wherever there’s a cultural conflict, Marxist-backed groups have been there to aggravate it. What better way to explain the orchestrated chaos we’ve been witnessing over the past several years, from the widespread riots of 2020 to the pro-Hamas protests of 2024, than an attempt to overthrow existing social conditions? And what better prize could they claim than to destroy Americans’ faith in elections? Those whose primary objective is to tear America down would relish a rigged election outcome, and the more broad and brazen the cheating, the better. Nothing would please Marxists more than to delegitimize democracy, and if they can leverage the “useful idiots” in the elite 1% to achieve that end, all the better. Our destruction is their victory. Regardless of what political party we belong to, we must do all we can to prevent the undermining of a free and fair election in the 2024 election so that, regardless of the outcome, we can continue the political fight. And we must commit ourselves to fully investigate and honestly prosecute any irregularities we see, no matter how big or how small, how many or how few. To allow cynicism—or worse, fatalism—to overtake us will be tantamount to surrender. If we can’t trust the process, particularly if it has been compromised right out in the open, we’ll all lose a lot more than one election. The post What if Destroying Faith in Our Elections Is the Point? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

It has been two weeks since palpably senile President Joe Biden delivered the single worst performance ever given in a presidential debate, and the fallout continues to tear the Democratic Party asunder. For two weeks, most of the left-wing corporate media, joined by a small but growing number of elected Democratic officials, have desperately been trying to convince Uncle Joe and Jill “Lady Macbeth” Biden to stand down. They have done so to no avail. Although some senior Democrats, such as former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., have wobbled, and a number of party backbenchers have publicly called for Biden to bow out of the race, most of the Democratic Party establishment remains behind their octogenarian presumptive nominee. Perhaps that is why Biden himself, in a Monday letter to Capitol Hill Democrats, forcefully declared his intention to stay in. With each new headline about the dam breaking, including Hollywood star George Clooney’s blistering New York Times op-ed this week calling for Biden to drop out, the president’s stubborn inner circle only further digs in its heels. As each additional day passes, it seems clearer that Biden will indeed be the Democrats’ standard-bearer this November. Democrats certainly cannot—and by all indications, affirmatively do not—feel confident or inspired by that seeming inevitability. On Tuesday, the highly regarded nonpartisan political handicapper Cook Political Report shifted six jurisdictions—Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District—in a Republican direction (the first three now “lean Republican,” and the latter three now only “lean Democrat”). Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin remain “tossup” territory for Cook, but Trump leads all three states in the polling averages. The Democratic panic has even reached bright-blue New York state, with Democratic Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine shockingly conceding that he “truly believe(s)” New York is now “a battleground state.” But Democrats truly have no better option. Cackler-in-chief Kamala Harris, the only even remotely plausible alternative due to her vice-presidential perch, is about as politically popular as venereal disease. And given the massive logistical issues that even switching to her at this late stage would bring, in terms of both federal campaign-finance law and state-level election law, why take the risk? Democrats need to take a long, hard look in the mirror. Because it is they themselves, their media enablers, and their closest allies who are entirely to blame for their current predicament. Begin with the Democratic National Committee itself. The DNC easily could have recognized the exact same warning signs the rest of the country saw—namely, the president’s obvious physical and mental decline—and encouraged a competitive and robust presidential primary process. But the DNC did no such thing. On the contrary, the DNC highly discouraged—to the point of virtually freezing out—competing primary campaigns. Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn., became the sole Democrat to mount a challenge—in which he laudably focused on Biden’s clear deterioration and unsuitability to serve an additional four years—and he received no backing whatsoever from the party, prominent Democratic officials, or major Democratic donors. The corporate media that serves as a modern-day Pravda for the Regime Party (Democrats) also bears a tremendous portion of the collective blame. For years, the press told us not to believe our lying eyes or our deceitful ears—the president is totally fine, and you are a MAGA Nazi kook if you believe otherwise! The media served as Biden’s Praetorian Guard, shielding him from prying scrutiny at all costs. They have completely reversed themselves since the presidential debate, only out of a sense of desperation and because they now realize the jig is up. But don’t be fooled: These miscreants have no sense of shame, nor do they possess even the slightest morsel of self-awareness. Finally, Biden’s tightknit inner circle—led above all by “Dr.” Jill Biden and former White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain—deserves a tremendous amount of blame not merely for their party’s misfortune, but for the current danger posed to the republic as a whole. Why exactly have these cynical monsters around Uncle Joe engaged in such a cover-up of this astounding magnitude? What is it that they have sought to gain? The answer seems to be straightforward enough: power—pure, unadulterated power, which fallible human beings have coveted ever since they first instituted governments among their fellow men. The contemptible harridan “Dr.” Jill is perhaps singularly responsible. She clearly does not care for her party or for her country. But is she really not human enough to spare her husband this humiliation and indignity before the whole world? Democrats and their media boosters find themselves in a no-win situation. And the culprit is not the nefarious “orange man” or his “deplorable” minions, but their very own hubris and myopia. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM The post Democrats Have Only Themselves to Blame for Their Joe Biden Mess appeared first on The Daily Signal.

CNN: When Will Obama and Pelosi Ride to the Rescue?

House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) sent letters to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Organization for Migration demanding more information about how the U.N. is helping the Biden administration “fast-track” illegal aliens into the United States through the administration’s “unlawful” pathways, the Daily Caller News Foundation reported.The letters, obtained by the DCNF, stated that the House Judiciary Committee is continuing to oversee the Biden administration’s enforcement of immigration laws.'Works to ensure more aliens arrive in the United States.'“Despite an unprecedented border crisis and the Biden Administration’s release of millions of illegal aliens into the United States, the Administration continues to create additional unlawful avenues to fast-track even more arrivals into the country,” both letters read. Jordan requested that the U.N. provide additional information about its partnership with the Biden administration, specifically regarding the U.S. State Department’s Safe Mobility Offices initiative. He noted that the UNHCR has claimed the program would “avoid the risks associated with onward movement.”“In other words, this new program fast-tracks aliens into the United States out of sight of the American people and without public transparency of the chaos at the border. Far from simply expanding the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, Safe Mobility Offices give aliens outside the United States ‘several options’ to resettle in the United States, including through ‘family reunification, labor pathways,’ and expansion of the Biden Administration’s illegal abuses of humanitarian parole,” Jordan wrote.He noted that the Biden administration’s initiative “reached 170,000 individuals” by the middle of April.According to the State Department’s website, the Safe Mobility Initiative “is one of the many ways” the Biden administration is providing “access to safe and lawful pathways from partner countries in the region at no cost, so refugees and vulnerable migrants don’t have to undertake dangerous journeys in search of safety and better opportunities.”“As part of its partnership with the U.S., UNHCR is ‘responsible for outreach in Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Ecuador to adequately reach individuals who might be interested and eligible in registering’ for the program through the initiative’s website,” Jordan wrote. “As UNHCR works to ensure more aliens arrive in the United States, American taxpayers continue to fund the organization’s work.”The IOM also “regularly promotes” the program and “shares information with aliens on how they can travel to the United States,” Jordan said.Since 2021, American taxpayers have shelled out over $6.3 billion to the UNHCR, the letters stated.Jordan requested documents and information from the U.N., including the UNHCR’s and the IOM’s communications with the Biden administration regarding the Safe Mobility Offices and the amount of funding the agencies have dedicated to the initiative.Neither the UNHCR nor the IOM responded to the DCNF’s request for comment. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Musicians are increasingly being emulated by artificial intelligence that is nearly indiscernible to the average ear.It’s already been more than a year since a ghostwriter created a song that used the voices of top-selling artists Drake and The Weeknd.This technology is being used far and wide, and if it weren’t for the fact that most who are using the technology are using recognizable songs from the Backstreet Boys or Britney Spears, for example, the emulation of popular artists could be even more prevalent.A simple YouTube search of AI versions of deceased artists brings up a lengthy catalogue to choose from, each singing popular songs that escape copyright infringement. Meaning, they are not detected by the algorithms of Google, Instagram, or others.Typically, the algorithm matches existing content on the platform and allows the content owner to apply for a copyright claim against the infringer. But when a user emulates an existing song with a different voice, he is getting the best of both worlds: the popular song and a different popular artist singing it who people haven’t heard before.“Major labels have teams of people who work on this. They also have lawyers on retainer who have a quota and are ready to sue,” said Steven Lee Rachel, A&R manager from Baste Records.“Of course, for the average independent artist, this solution is mostly out of reach ... [this] AI thing is new and very messy,” he told Blaze News.New AI users can circumvent this completely, although without the added push of an existing artist. Enter: Suno.Suno is a new app making waves for its ability to create full-length songs in a desired style and pace, with as specific subject matter as the user wants. The creator can inject lyrics or leave it up to the system to create its own from simple prompts, while also pulling references from the internet to fill in the blanks.'AI has the potential to replace artists altogether.'In fact, it took just seconds for Suno to come up with a song for this article using the following prompt: “A pop, boy-band song with multiple voices about artificial intelligence replacing musicians' jobs and causing the artists to go broke and become journalists.” Your browser does not support the video tag. "I think it should be illegal,” rapper Bryson Gray said of AI music. “Replicating someone’s voice and passing it off as them likely already is, but it needs to be rejected in almost all its forms,” Gray added, leaving room for parodies of public figures like the president.Suno and fellow AI company Udio are being sued by labels like Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, and Warner Music Group, according to the Los Angeles Times. The groups allege that the platforms took material from copyright-protected songs.Suno chief executive Mikey Shulman reportedly said that the company’s mission was simply “to make it possible for everyone to make music,” not to “memorize and regurgitate pre-existing content.”“That is why we don’t allow user prompts that reference specific artists,” he said.Udio reportedly said it stands by its technology, adding that “generative AI will become a mainstay of modern society.”Likeness sellsWould artists sell their likeness for music to be made in their voice? Gray said he couldn’t see a true artist doing that, as he never would. But, in place of a lack of writing skills, some might, he added.Baste Records’ Rachel said this was already happening and “has been in the works for a long time.”“Remember the Tupac hologram?” he asked. “When KISS retired they sold off their image and likeness to the labels. This is happening for sure.”“It will depend on the audience in terms of accepting it. For now, there is a bit of an anti-AI movement. When Paul McCartney used AI to finish the last Beatles song, I think people were a little weirded out. Eventually people will probably be more accepting of different uses of AI for legacy acts,” Rachel predicted.While there is mainstream acceptance of AI in music to date, it is certainly at the forefront of other forms of modern media. Legendary broadcaster Al Michaels is perhaps the first big name to publicly sell off his likeness to networks to be used in an AI format. The 79-year-old has sold the rights to his voice to NBC for use during coverage of the Olympics.Michaels was “very skeptical” of the idea, according to Vanity Fair, before eventually accepting it.“What would I sound like? ... Would I sound like a guy who just spews clichés? Would my voice be different?” he reportedly asked. Once he heard it, however, the announcer is said to have changed his mind. “Frankly, it was astonishing. It was amazing ... and it was a little bit frightening.” The sports commentator said that the likeness was only about 2% off of being perfect.Representatives from IBM alluded to this technology when previously speaking to Blaze News.'The stuff I'm seeing now is creepy and soulless, and you can feel it.'Referring to the company’s technology known as IBM watsonx, the reps said that the company is using AI similarly for both Wimbledon and the Masters.Fans can have AI detail up-to-date action from the events and even have it read to them as if it were play-by-play announcing. Right now, voice actors are said to be lending their voices to the technology, something that would obviously change with time and depend on the popularity of the outcomes.Similarly, AI tech has been publicly used for translating popular videos and podcasts.YouTube’s top content creator, Mr. Beast, spoke on the topic in mid-2023 saying that he was using YouTube’s new audio dubbing technology to translate his videos into 11 different languages. This has the obvious benefit of massively expanding reach.The key, which Yahoo reported, is that the translation is in the same voice, with the same inflections and emotions. A few months later, Spotify would announce similar technology to translate its podcasts. The platform said its technology was developed in-house but with OpenAI’s voice-generation technology. This technology is essentially made possible by feeding in the likely thousands of hours of speech that podcasters, YouTubers, and artists have into a program. The more data the program has, the easier it is to replicate the voice. This is why so many at-home audio engineers have found such success in making media that sounds just like the intended artist. The AI programs are getting faster and better, too. Microsoft’s VALL-E claims it can replicate a voice with just three seconds of audio.The replacements Artists that spoke to Blaze News about the potential of AI musicians and AI-generated music intersected at a few similar points; perhaps most prevalent was the idea of the humanity behind the music.Folk rocker Five Times August, real name Brad Skistimas, called AI a slippery slope that “might be beneficial” in rare cases.“The stuff I'm seeing now is creepy and soulless, and you can feel it. Obviously, AI technology will get better, but I like to think ultimately people will find their way to real artists with unique talents and voices once they realize there's nothing to humanly connect with,” he added.“AI has the potential to replace artists altogether,” country artist Chad Prather warned. “The blood, sweat, tears, sacrifice, and grind can be eliminated.” “You don’t need to sound good or look good to be marketable, and it has the potential to destroy the live music business. The most dangerous aspect is that legacy will be lost.”To Prather’s point, this has and is being attempted. AI rapper FN Meka was a disaster for Capitol Records when it allegedly went too far in 2022. The so-called artist caused outrage when it consistently used the N-word and was called an amalgamation of stereotypes of black artists.It’s been almost a year since Warner Music signed its own AI artist called Noonoouri. The pretend artist had deals with Dior, Versace, and Kim Kardashian’s brands. While Noonoouri is still releasing music, the problem still exists that without that humanity behind them, AI artists still truly can’t exist; but advocates might claim that is reason enough to move forward.FN Meka had a human voice perform the vocals, while Noonoouri was created in 2011 by Germans who used a real woman’s voice — altered by AI — to create the vocals. While it still has a following, it clearly hasn’t become as influential as the label had hoped. “I think we'll definitely see major labels trying to leverage legacy artists who aren't here anymore, like Elvis or Michael Jackson, in an effort to create ‘new’ music,” Skistimas continued.Hip-hop artist and attorney Patriot J said that he does see a future where "popular artists will sell their likeness" for AI songs. "All it takes is one major music artist to be the first domino to fall," he noted."Me personally, I wouldn't let my voice by used in that way, but just like GMOs are now labeled in stores, I'd hope AI-likeness music would be labeled on streaming platforms."Baste Records’ Rachel added that “the new technology will bring new precedents" for the music industry.“The Suno and Udio lawsuit will settle a lot of things. Everyone knew they were the best AI music generation tools, everyone knew they were infringing on copyrighted material, and everyone knew they were going to get sued. So now they are getting sued. Let's see what happens,” Rachel noted.As is stands, the more likely scenario looking ahead is the continued authorized (and unauthorized) uses of existing artists. That is, until AI-generated programs get good enough at song writing, while simultaneously producing believable voices.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!