A gunman fatally shot three people and left a fourth critically wounded Wednesday at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas. The shooter‚ whom police successfully eliminated‚ has been identified as a disgruntled business professor who was recently turned down for a job at the institution. The shooting Sheriff Kevin McMahill of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department indicated that at approximately 11:45 a.m.‚ police received reports of an active shooter at the UNLV campus. Both metropolitan and campus police raced to the scene. The gunman reportedly began his rampage on the fourth floor of the building wherein the university's Lee Business School operates. Responding to the crackle of gunfire‚ UNLV professor Kevaney Martin took shelter in a classroom along with another faculty member and three students‚ reported the Associated Press. "It was terrifying. I can't even begin to explain‚" said Martin‚ who took cover under a desk. "I was trying to hold it together for my students and trying not to cry‚ but the emotions are something I never want to experience again." Jordan Eckermann‚ 25‚ noted that a loud bang followed by an alarm interrupted his business law class. His professor urged the class to remain calm‚ but students nevertheless panicked. Eckermann recalled scoping out the hallway and encountering a law enforcement officer in tactical gear who instructed him to exit the building. Minutes after exiting‚ Eckermann said he heard a score of gunshots. The shooter had stalked several floors of the building before campus police engaged him in a shootout outside Beam Hall. Officers swiftly eliminated the shooter‚ according to Adam Garcia‚ director of University Police Services Southern Command. The all-clear was given roughly 40 minutes after the first report of shots fired. Three individuals were confirmed dead‚ and a fourth victim was taken to Sunrise Hospital. McMahill noted the fourth victim had been upgraded to stable condition by the early evening. Four other people were reportedly taken to a hospital suffering "panic attacks‚" and two officers were treated for minor injuries. The victims have not yet been identified by police. — (@) "What happened today is a heinous‚ unforgivable crime‚" said McMahill. "But I want y'all to know something‚" continued the sheriff. "It's a crime that we train for each and every day. When there's an active shooter threat‚ the men and the women of the Southern Nevada first responder community — police‚ fire‚ and EMS — come together quickly and decisively with zero hesitation." The sheriff alluded to the October 2017 massacre where 60 people were gunned down at a country music festival in Las Vegas and 400 more were wounded‚ intimating that the LVMPD has worked hard to ensure that atrocity at such a scale would never again strike the city. McMahill noted that the actions of one police officer in particular ensured that no harm came to the large gathering of students at a Lego exhibit outside the hall where the shootings occurred. Classes at the university have been canceled for the remainder of the week. The shooter Law enforcement sources told ABC News that the dead shooter was a 67-year-old academic who had unsuccessfully applied for a college professorship at UNLV. According to his LinkedIn profile‚ the alleged suspect worked as an associate professor at East Carolina University in North Carolina from 2001 until 2017. It appears he also briefly taught at the University of Northern Iowa and the University of Georgia. Although he received a doctorate in philosophy at the University of Georgia‚ he largely taught business classes. Newsweek reported that the former ECU professor's personal website features a section titled "Theories Regarding Various Mysteries &; Puzzles‚" containing a document wherein he claimed he decoded the Zodiac Killer's cryptic messages. In addition to listing leftist billionaire George Soros and "Open Society" advocate Karl Popper among the "Great Minds of the Twentieth Century" on his website‚ the alleged suspect also had a section listing "Powerful Organzations [sic] Bent on Global Domination!" such as the Rothschild family‚ the U.N.‚ and the Illuminati. Officials Provide New Details on the Active Shooter Incident at UNLV youtu.be Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

President Biden announced another round of federal student loan debt cancellation on Wednesday despite the Supreme Court's rejection earlier this year of the administration's previous $430 billion forgiveness program.The White House stated that the administration plans to cancel $4.8 billion in federal student loan debt for an additional 80‚300 borrowers. "This brings total approved debt cancellation by the Biden-Harris Administration to $132 billion for over 3.6 million Americans‚" the White House boasted in a Wednesday press release.The latest round of debt cancellation aims "to fix Public Service Loan Forgiveness‚ so teachers‚ members of the military‚ nurses‚ and other public service workers get the relief they have earned‚" Biden stated. "And it's because of actions my Administration took to make sure that borrowers who have been in repayment for at least 20 years – but didn't accurately get credit for student loan payments – get the relief they are entitled to."Biden's announcement bragged about the administration's achievements for students and borrowers‚ much of which has been at the expense of American taxpayers."Today's announcement comes on top of all we've been able to achieve for students and student loan borrowers in the past few years‚" the press release continued. "This includes: achieving the largest increases in Pell Grants in over a decade to help families who earn less than roughly $60‚000 a year; fixing the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program so that borrowers who go into public service get the debt relief they're entitled to under the law; and creating the most generous Income-Driven Repayment plan in history – the SAVE plan."In June‚ the Supreme Court struck down the administration's plan to implement sweeping student debt forgiveness that would have canceled $10‚000 of debt for individuals earning less than $125‚000 yearly and married couples earning less than $250‚000 yearly. Borrowers who received Pell Grants would have been eligible to have an additional $10‚000 of their debt canceled under the administration's program. "In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision on our student debt relief plan‚ we are continuing to pursue an alternative path to deliver student debt relief to as many borrowers as possible as quickly as possible‚" Biden stated Wednesday.A November report from the Government Accountability Office‚ a federal watchdog‚ found that the administration's unilateral loan cancellation plan failed to implement safeguards to protect against potential fraud. Before the Supreme Court blocked the program‚ the administration had automatically approved 26 million borrowers to be eligible to receive the debt cancellation‚ the GAO found. Over 12 million of those applicants were reportedly approved without submitting any income documentation. Another 2 million of those borrowers were automatically approved based on income reported on previous financial aid applications or loan repayment plans that contained potentially outdated information‚ the watchdog's report stated."[The Education Department] and GAO have both previously identified problems with people underreporting their income on these forms‚ but the department did not take any steps to verify incomes for these borrowers before automatically approving them for relief. Federal internal control standards state that managers should take steps to mitigate fraud risks‚ but Education did not deploy any tools to verify these borrowers' incomes or ensure they were eligible for relief‚" the GAO reported.In August‚ the administration provided $72 million in debt cancellation to 2‚300 borrowers who were "misled and deceived" by Ashford University‚ which is based in San Diego‚ California. According to a lawsuit filed in 2017‚ the school "made numerous substantial misrepresentations" of its institution.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

I used to slip nonsense into my college essays — often lines from Lewis Carroll’s “Jabberwocky” — to prove that my papers weren’t really being read. After receiving glowing but vacuous praise on a Psych 101 essay but no interaction with any of my ideas‚ I started cribbing from Lewis Carroll: Beware the Jabberwock‚ my son! The jaws that bite‚ the claws that catch! Beware the Jubjub bird‚ and shun The frumious Bandersnatch! And so on. Perhaps on some Jungian level I felt compelled to slay the dragon of the slothful prof. Or perhaps I really meant Freudian? I don’t know. I never worked very hard on the psychology aspect after that first essay. And now‚ when I face a sea of papers from my bright-eyed university sophomores‚ I confess to feeling a little anxious‚ wondering whether someone will try to do to me what I did to my own professor decades ago. Certainly‚ I now have more compassion for that professor than my youthful hubris allowed. Reading an endless pile of essays hammered out at 2 a.m. the night before is a correspondence course in Sisyphean suffering. But mostly I’ve discovered‚ in grading 25 years of essays‚ that it’s largely quotidian drivel. Students grind out the work‚ taking no pleasure in the effort‚ and it’s a rare (but delightful) student seeking intellectual swordplay with the teacher. Maybe for this reason‚ above all others‚ I’m dreading what artificial intelligence is about to do to my students. There’s no personality where there’s no person. Artificial intelligence is unlikely to make us smarter even as it helps us generate unimaginable terabytes of new text. Once I had a hard meeting with a young member of a fraternity when I noticed his rough draft‚ attached to a cleaner final‚ had been printed on a daisy-wheel printer‚ some prelapsarian floss of technology that I had seen in my youth‚ and it had been ancient even then. Suspicion piqued‚ I took a closer look at his citations. He there claimed to have interviewed a certain “Carol Schmidt” for the essay when the lad might have been 18 months old. Precocious little punk! When we met‚ I asked him how Carol was doing. He had no idea who I was talking about. His confession was nearly immediate: He had drawn the essay from a filing cabinet his fraternity house maintained to help members avoid work. The Greek youth had required enough pluck to retype the essay and change the dubious dates along the way. At least he would have had to read the old essay. He had to keep a straight face when he handed it‚ physically‚ to me. AI requires less input and substantially less initiative. A human being placed this section header here If you’ve not tinkered with some of the AI engines‚ they can write about as well as any B- college student. You need to feed an AI a decent prompt. Some‚ such as ChatGPT‚ will warn you that they are able only to fabricate sources. But others‚ like Agent GPT‚ will happily embed research and cite it using both signal phrases and in-text citations. And they are currently undetectable ... in the sense that universities won’t back a professor who knows it’s AI. That is not proof in the litigious world of university education. Even in the case of plagiarism‚ universities for several years have often balked at enforcing their own bans and consequences‚ despite overwhelming proof. Each engine has its own tells‚ identifiable quirks‚ and favored words‚ but the tells change as the AI engines are updated. In my decades of teaching‚ subject headers interrupting the body text announcing the topic of the next major section were exceedingly rare. Textbooks did that‚ sure‚ but not student writers. Then‚ this past summer‚ probably a third of the essays in my two online classes suddenly sported bold section headers. Turns out that’s how ChatGPT likes to structure its essays. You can tell it not to‚ of course‚ but that was its standard move. When I mocked this habit to a composition class this fall‚ the headers disappeared abruptly. What do you know‚ really? It's hard to blame the students. They are being told that AI is a near-perfect good. Sure‚ there are copyright questions about the content it’s allowed to digest‚ but we see only the feeblest gestures toward the long-term intellectual damage that outsourcing writing to AI will cause. In a STEM culture that normally prostrates itself before the word and thought of Francis Bacon‚ for his defining of the scientific method‚ I have only been met with silence when I remind my administration that Bacon also declared‚ “Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man.” Without reading‚ you’ve got nothing to digest‚ like ChapGPT with no content. Without discussion and debate‚ you cannot see the weaknesses in your own thinking. And without writing‚ your thinking is imprecise and embryonic. So the wager average students now face is this: I can get an 85% score without trying. If I try‚ I score in the 70% range. That’s my best. The below-average student faces even greater temptation: I could fail if I try. I will pass if I don’t. The top performers are the only category of student who might benefit from AI in the way that it is being championed. Such a student could take the AI’s evidence and logic and improve upon it. At least‚ that’s how most professionals are using AI. We use it for suggestions‚ for sketches of ideas‚ for summaries of possibly tangential influences‚ and then we follow those leads. Wielded well‚ AI functions like the cadre of researchers and writers who supported James Michener or the veritable factory of writers in Alexandre Dumas’ studio. To properly wield AI‚ however‚ you need the capacity to recognize good writing and to tweak competent writing into something better. You also need to recognize baloney. For example‚ Open AI’s Dall-E image generator refused to produce an image for me in the style of Vermeer. When I asked why‚ it explained that “creating an image in the style of a specific artist whose latest work was created after 1912‚ such as Johannes Vermeer‚ is not permitted according to the content policy.” It admitted it was wrong when I pointed out that Vermeer had died in 1675 but nevertheless continued to refuse to mimic that particular style. Behind the veneer of false promises Even if talented students might use AI to improve themselves — doing more‚ reaching farther — the fact remains that many talented students are groomed to see the arts as mere obstacles to their STEM careers. A recruiter at a top engineering school my daughter recently visited bemoaned that the stereotype of engineers was sometimes true and that many talented students nevertheless needed to improve their soft skills. Barely a minute later‚ and without a trace of irony‚ he encouraged my daughter to “get rid of” those pesky required humanities classes before graduating from high school so she could get straight to the engineering content as a university student. Artificial intelligence is unlikely to make us smarter even as it helps us generate unimaginable terabytes of new text. It will prove a valuable tool for the intellectual elite to work faster to produce texts that will‚ increasingly‚ be unread by the nouveau éduqué who will come to their credentials in the era of AI. But don’t take my word for it. I asked AgentGPT to write a research-backed essay on AI's negative impact on student writing. It offered the following research-supported concerns about the potential negative impacts of AI upon student writing. Other than a few trims‚ I made no changes to the verbiage of this selection from that piece: Research by Dr. Joel Garza‚ an associate professor at Stanford University‚ shows that students who frequently utilize AI for writing tend to replicate pre-existing content. This imitation hampers the cultivation of their individual writing styles and limits the development of their voice ( Garza‚ 2018[JB1] ). AgentGPT opted to use the American Psychological Association method for in-text citation‚ which is a little odd given the field of writing would prefer the Modern Language Association style‚ and the research behind AI would likely have used the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers’ style or something equally technical. AI's ability to generate content may inadvertently encourage plagiarism or discourage students from putting in the effort required to express their thoughts uniquely. AgentGPT chose to use a numerated list‚ and I selected only its latter points here. I might have advised a student to rely on more embedded text cues to reveal the structure‚ but as you will see‚ the writing is clear and uses evidence well. 3. Limited Feedback and Personalized Guidance: Contrary to popular belief‚ AI's automated feedback systems may not provide students with the personalized guidance needed for improving their writing skills. A study conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) found that AI-powered tools provide generic feedback‚ often missing the nuances of individual writing styles and unique strengths and weaknesses (MIT‚ 2020). Such generic guidance fails to address specific areas for improvement‚ inhibiting students' growth in writing proficiency. 4. Over-Reliance on AI Algorithms: The increasing availability of AI algorithms in educational settings risks fostering an over-reliance on automated systems‚ leading to a passive approach to writing. A report by the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) argues that excessive dependence on AI threatens to detach students from the writing process by turning writing into a mechanical task rather than a creative endeavor (NCTE‚ 2017). Bonus points available if you can identify some troubling things about that passage from AgentGPT. Here’s a hint: No one named Joel Garza appears to work at Stanford. Second hint: A study conducted at MIT should nevertheless have an author whose name would be cited. Ditto NCTE. But kudos for their prescience‚ divining that excessive dependence on AI in the writing process could be detrimental all the way back in 2017‚ five years before ChatGPT made its public debut. If we needed a better metaphor for the false promise of AI‚ I’d be hard-pressed to invent one. It’s clean. It’s persuasive. It seems plausible. Reasonable even. But it’s safe‚ not near the fringe where you might doubt anything it says. It’s middling‚ in fact. Not bland‚ but well inside the lines. Taupe. Anne Murray. Delaware. Perfectly fine. And it’s lying through its horrid‚ artificialis dentes. Beware! The jaws that bite‚ the claws that catch!

An Internal Revenue Service whistleblower testified that first son Hunter Biden received almost $5 million in loans for personal expenses and attempted to avoid paying taxes on income he made from Ukrainian energy company Burisma.The loans were received as part of a series of borrowings during President Joe Biden's run for president‚ Just the News reported‚ from a Democratic donor named Kevin Patrick Morris.Over $5 million was lent to Hunter Biden‚ with funds used to pay off personal expenses and delinquent tax payments."Hunter received approximately $4.9 million in payments for personal expenses‚ again in the form of a loan and gift from Democratic donor Kevin Patrick Morris‚" IRS agent Joseph Ziegler told the House Ways and Means Committee in closed-door testimony."As stated in my previous testimony‚ I read a note from Hunter Biden’s 2020 tax return that Hunter Biden received a loan from a third party‚ known to be Kevin Patrick Morris‚ in paying off Hunter Biden’s delinquent taxes‚" he added.The whistleblower described a "pattern" of attempts to avoid paying taxes‚ including on income earned from the controversial energy company‚ Burisma Holdings Limited‚ for which Hunter Biden was a board member."Hunter appeared to follow a pattern of attempting to avoid paying taxes on relevant income. This first started with Hunter not reporting the Burisma income in 2014 and allegedly falsely claiming that it was a loan to him‚" Ziegler testified. "He‚ again‚ tried to claim the millions in income earned from Hudson West III was a loan to him‚ which was refuted by the evidence and was not allowed by his tax accountants."Hudson West III was a joint venture between Hunter Biden and Chinese businessman Gongwen Dong‚ according to the Washington Times.Ziegler went on to claim that the same donor‚ Morris‚ made a $160‚000 payment "in an attempt to pay off Hunter Biden’s delinquent 2015 tax debt‚ which was a point of contention with Hunter’s ex-wife at the time.""Hunter may have been in breach of his marital separation agreement‚ and Hunter’s ex-wife at the time was having an issue renewing her passport due to the delinquent tax debt‚" Ziegler went on.The revelations come at the same time it was revealed by whistleblowers that President Biden had allegedly been using alias email accounts to communicate directly with Hunter Biden's business partners.The president allegedly used aliases such as "robinware456‚" "JRBware‚" and "RobertLPeters" to send emails to his son and his business associates.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

An artificial intelligence firm recently announced that it plans to stop partnering with China-based companies after United States intel officials raised security concerns regarding its ties to foreign entities.The Financial Times reported Thursday that G42‚ an AI group based in the United Arab Emirates‚ will phase out its relationships with Chinese hardware suppliers.G42 has worked with AstraZeneca‚ OpenAI‚ Dell Technologies‚ and Huawei. Additionally‚ it previously purchased $100 million shares in ByteDance‚ the Chinese parent company of TikTok.The company’s CEO‚ Peng Xiao‚ who was born in China‚ studied in the U.S.‚ and is now a UAE citizen‚ told the outlet‚ “For better or worse‚ as a commercial company‚ we are in a position where we have to make a choice.”“We cannot work with both sides. We can’t‚” he added.“The impression we are getting from [the] U.S. government and U.S. partners is we need to be very cautious‚” Xiao continued. “In order for us to further our relationship — which we cherish — with our U.S. partners‚ we simply cannot do much more with [previous] Chinese partners.” Xiao told the Financial Times that G42 never had “deep AI research relationships” with China-based companies “because‚ frankly speaking‚ they’re not leaders in this domain.”What’s the background?In November‚ two U.S. intel officials warned about G42’s ties to China‚ claiming the firm may have given millions of Americans’ genetic data to the Chinese government‚ the New York Times reported. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and National Security Adviser Sheikh Tahnoun bin Zayed Al Nahyan of the United Arab Emirates told the Biden administration in June that G42 appeared to be hiding the extent of its partnerships with China‚ according to the news outlet. The Biden administration reportedly insisted the company cut ties with the China-based companies and even considered implementing sanctions.G42’s technology infrastructure was built with the assistance of Chinese hardware firms. According to the company‚ it plans to phase out hardware provided by Huawei.The AI firm told the Financial Times that it has been “at the forefront of technological advancements” and touted its “overwhelmingly positive” contributions to governance‚ ethics‚ and regulations within the AI industry.Nikki Sun with think tank Chatham House told the Financial Times that it is “very unlikely” that G42 will completely sever ties to Chinese companies.“It’s unsurprising that G42‚ as an AI-focused start-up‚ engages with China‚ given China’s extensive role in the global AI value chain‚ from hardware‚ talent‚ to end market‚” Sun stated.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

During the 2023 Los Angeles Auto Show‚ Amazon‚ the e-commerce giant‚ in collaboration with its new partner‚ Hyundai‚ announced its intention to begin vehicle sales on its website in the second half of 2024. Hyundai vehicles will be the first cars available on Amazon's platform‚ with other brands set to follow later in the year. Customers will then have the option either to collect their vehicles from nearby dealerships or have them delivered to their doorsteps at their convenience. It's worth noting that the ultimate seller of the vehicle remains the dealership itself for the moment; Amazon's platform will act as an intermediary between the customer and the dealership. “This new shopping experience will create another way for dealers to build awareness of their selection and offer convenience to their customers‚” Amazon wrote in a post. Amazon has gradually ventured into the automotive realm‚ offering virtual showrooms for specific brands and price comparison tools. Additionally‚ the platform also facilitates the purchase of certain car parts and accessories. In 48 states‚ there are laws in place that either restrict or prohibit manufacturers from selling vehicles directly to consumers. However‚ this landscape has begun to change recently‚ primarily due to Tesla's popularity. Tesla does not rely on independent dealerships. Instead‚ it sells directly to consumers. Dealership associations in multiple states have initiated numerous legal actions against Tesla to prevent the company from selling cars directly‚ but they have failed. Mike Sullivan‚ who owns several dealerships in the Los Angeles area‚ including the Hyundai Santa Monica location‚ openly endorsed the news during his appearance at the LA Auto Show. “We’re now partnering with one of the world’s leading digital retailers‚” Sullivan said. “They’ve led the way in delivering customer convenience‚ and now they’re going to help us take our customer experience to the next level. Amazon also brings massive reach and marketing power to connect to more customers. We can’t wait to get started.” This news means that Amazon is entering another business sector‚ and while it seems the company wants to play nice with the dealers‚ there’s no reason it might not suddenly decide to undercut them and reshape car sales. Car dealerships have become a prominent influence within American politics‚ exerting significant control over a substantial portion of the political landscape. In 2022‚ they distributed an unprecedented $7 million toward federal lobbying efforts‚ surpassing even the National Rifle Association in financial contributions. Furthermore‚ during the 2020 federal elections‚ car dealerships dedicated a staggering $25 million‚ primarily supporting Republican candidates. In addition to these contributions‚ the NADA PAC added another $5 million to their political endeavors. However‚ these financial contributions are just one facet of their involvement. Car dealerships extend their influence to the state and local levels as well. They play a substantial role within their communities by investing in local advertising‚ sponsoring local sports teams‚ and nurturing a social network that can be advantageous for political campaigns. Politicians rely on their financial support and extensive networks‚ while car dealerships depend on politicians to safeguard the laws that ensure a steady flow of revenue. It's important to note that car dealerships are dispersed nationwide‚ with a presence in every district‚ making their influence widespread and diffuse. They lobby to ensure no rival dealerships can be built by controlling zoning and vehicle sales licenses. The dealership model ensures that Americans are charged an inflated rate to buy a new car and is emblematic of a form of modern capitalism that is not a free market. Whether Amazon uses Tesla’s model and sells directly to consumers remains to be seen.

Nancy Wilson was a surprise guest at Ann Wilson's October 2023 concert. The pair are performing as Heart in December 2023 with more in 2024 The post So‚ Is It a Tour? Heart Books More Concerts‚ First Shows Since 2019 appeared first on Best Classic Bands.

The summer's biggest tour will play North American venues The post Def Leppard and Journey Set 2024 Stadium Tour With Steve Miller Band‚ Heart and Cheap Trick appeared first on Best Classic Bands.

This was like having friends over for a boozy party‚ minus the booze‚ and in a theater instead of a parlor. The post Liverpool Get-Together: The Most Touching Show The Beatles Ever Gave appeared first on Best Classic Bands.

In Episode 328 Jeff Belanger and Ray Auger explore some ancient petroglyphs along the Connecticut River in Bellows Falls‚ Vermont. These carved faces have perplexed locals for centuries. Who put them here and why? Are they ancient Abenaki graffiti? Do they mark a sacred place? Or could they have out-of-this-world origins? BECOME A LEGENDARY PATRON: https://www.patreon.com/NewEnglandLegends CREDITS: Produced and hosted by: Jeff Belanger and Ray Auger Edited by: Ray Auger Theme Music by: John Judd SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST FOR FREE: Apple Podcasts/iTunes | Google Podcasts | Spotify | Pandora | Amazon Podcasts | TuneIn | iHeartRadio JOIN OUR SUPER-SECRET: New England Legends Facebook Group