Author: Ken Goetz

Biden versus Trump: What Can We Do?

Posted on by Ken Goetz

Biden versus Trump: What Can We Do? I’ve written about this problem before (see here and here), but events continue to move in the wrong direction. Will we have the opportunity to vote for a candidate we actually prefer during our next presidential election? Doesn’t look like it. Both Biden and Trump have unfavorable ratings of 55% according to recent polls (see Biden’s here, and Trump’s here) And their approval ratings are hovering between the upper 30s to low 40s. Nevertheless, unless a miracle occurs, those two tainted individuals are headed toward an undesirable slug fest in 2024. WHAT CAN WE DO?

First, try to recall a time when two more unpalatable candidates vied for our presidency. Admittedly, there have been some colossal duds in the past, but I submit that never before have our choices been so bleak. Both Biden and Trump are imbued with scary traits. I’ll consider here just two of each candidate’s many drawbacks.

Personal attributes

Mr. Biden:

People talk about his age. A recent Wall Street Journal poll found that 73% of voters think him too old to run for president. Some 60% say he isn’t mentally capable. I’m most concerned about his mental acuity, which is in shreds. Even partisan Democrats must have noticed the endless indications of the man’s dotage. One telling recent blooper occurred at a private campaign event, in which Biden told a story about why he chose to run. Minutes later he told the same story again, almost word for word, as verified by a transcript of the speech later published by the White House. Think about that. An aware person may repeat a word, but not an entire story after just telling it. In short, Mr. Biden’s mental status is dismal, and far below the level necessary to adequately perform duties of the presidency.

Mr. Trump:

Although he is just three years younger than Biden, fewer people focus on his age. His brash, vindictive personality weighs him down far more than his age. Try to recall all the former friends and associates that Trump has turned his vengeance on. It would take some doing to log all the bodies strewn in his wake. Accordingly, it seems likely that the former president, if he were to move back into the White House, would spend much of his time settling what he considers old grievances. Moreover, it was obvious that Mr. Trump did little to dignify the presidency while he occupied the White House, and it is difficult to imagine his behavior would improve if he were reelected. In short, Mr. Trump’s aggressive and vindictive personality likely would inflame the already-divisive Washington climate and thereby hinder his performance as president. 

Legal difficulties

Mr. Trump:

1) The former president is immersed in a swamp of legal problems. He faces charges that legal experts say portends a dangerous road ahead for him.

2) In Washington federal court, he is charged with conspiring to defraud the U.S. by preventing Congress from certifying Biden’s victory over Trump and thus depriving voters of their right to a fair election.

3) A Georgia grand jury has issued an indictment accusing him of efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

4) A federal court in Miami has charged him with unlawfully keeping classified national security documents when he left office in 2021 and lying to officials who sought to recover them.

5) A New York grand jury indicted him for allegedly falsifying business records in connection with a hush-money payment (allegedly using campaign funds) to a porn star before the 2016 presidential election.

6) A New York attorney has  sued Trump and his family business, the Trump Organization, in September 2022 for alleged fraud by him and his family.

Mr. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all of the above charges. Each of them, it should be noted, carries possible prison sentences. Stay tuned.

Mr. Biden:

1) House Republicans have started an impeachment inquiry of the current president, this concerning whether Mr. Biden collaborated with his son, Hunter, in enriching the son, other family members, and the president himself.

2) I don’t pretend to know fact from fiction here, but one point seems self-evident, that being that Hunter Biden has neither the knowledge nor the expertise to have earned (without help) the millions of dollars he collected from foreign sources. As has been widely reported, a sizeable amount of circumstantial evidence suggests his father, while vice president, was linked to Hunter’s earnings. I’m not alone. Some 61% of those in a recent poll (see here) believe that Mr. Biden had some level of involvement in Hunter’s business dealings — and 42% think that he acted illegally (there has been no proof of wrongdoing by the president). 

3) According to Business Insider, subpoenaed bank records reveal that the Biden family created over 20 shell companies (companies through which they reportedly received about $20 million in payments from foreign sources). Bankrate.com defines a shell company, or shell corporation as an entity that typically lacks active business operations or employees. Shell companies can have many possible uses, from serving as vehicles to raise funds to facilitating corporate mergers, but they may also be used by individuals and companies to evade taxes, launder money and hide the identities of their owners.

4) It also has been reported that a total of nine Biden family members received unexplained wire transfers from foreign businesses. Even two of Biden’s grandchildren received payments. It’s unclear which grandchildren received payments, but most of them are in their early twenties with no personal or business ties to Ukraine, Russia, or China.

5) An IRS whistle blower, Joseph Ziegler, who works in the agency’s International Tax and Financial Crime section, said in his opening statement before Congress that he was the lead IRS case agent on the investigation and that the IRS had recommended both felony and misdemeanor charges against the president’s son.  That recommendation was ignored. “I have a reason to believe that there was gross mismanagement present throughout this investigation,” Ziegler said.

6) According to Hunter Biden’s former associates, the Vice President joined Hunter in telephone conversations with the foreign representatives who provided money to Hunter.

Mr Biden denies that he was in any way connected to his son’s businesses. The investigation continues. Stay tuned.

Final thoughts

I’ll end where I began. Biden versus Trump: What can we do? Well, we can raise a fuss, and many of us can raise many fusses. If that fails, we can individually assess the multiple drawbacks of each of these sorry candidates. Once that is decided, we then can vote against the one considered to be the worst. By doing that, We the People of the United States, will form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, just as the preamble to our Constitution proclaims.

If you agree that a Biden – Trump ticket is not what our country needs, please consider forwarding this post to others, and urge them to do the same. Who knows? Perhaps we can make a difference.

 

Does a Striking Football Player let his Teammates Down?

Posted on by Ken Goetz

Does a striking football player let his teammates down? That question came up recently, and I’ve taken a crack at answering it. To come up with a reasonable answer, I’ve tried to imagine that I’m a valuable player on an outstanding professional football team, the reigning Super Bowl champion, no less, and I’ve further assumed I’m making something like a cool $20 million a year as a defensive tackle. (I almost broke my noggin with those ridiculous assumptions, but I tried to be creative.) I made one final assumption: I’m now in the last year of a 4-year contract worth $80 million, so I’ve been in the bucks for a while.

It was even more difficult for me  to assume that I’m not happy with that $20 million bundle of chicken feed. But I pretended I was unhappy. Why? Because another defensive tackle on another team, probably the best tackle in the league, is making more than I am.

Continuing my little game, I filled in more blanks. I have not reported to camp for pre-season drills. I have not shown up for any team practices, and I have not been with the team for any of its pre-season games. And I won’t be playing in the opening game against the Detroit Lions tonight, on September 7.

Now I’m trying to imagine how my teammates might feel about all of this.

As many of you realized, I was pretending to be a character in what is a real-life situation. Chris Jones of the Kansas City Chiefs is in the position I imagined I was in, and he seems to be firmly entrenched (see here). Naturally, I don’t know what motives are directing Jones’s behavior, but I’m convinced he’s off base when he talks about how his teammates, those hoping to return to the Super Bowl this season, feel about his prolonged absence.

When Jones was asked whether he might be letting his teammates down, he responded, “How have I let them down? It’s just like when you’re at your job, and you ask for an extension — you ask for a raise.”

 “Who are you letting down for asking your boss for a raise?” he continued.

Well, I’ve thought about that question. Here are a couple of things for you to consider, Mr. Jones. When asking the boss for a raise, please consider that one usually doesn’t quit working while asking for more money. Beyond that, if the person asking for a raise is involved in a vital team project, wouldn’t that person’s absence be hurting other members of his team?

To be more specific, Mr. Jones, your teammates on the Kansas Chiefs are vying for another trip to the Super Bowl, and a weakness in their defensive line could lead to the loss of one or more games that might otherwise be won if you were playing. Such unfortunate losses would reduce the Chiefs’s seasonal record and possibly prevent your teammates from reaching their goal this year.

So, Mr. Jones, please understand that your prolonged absence is indeed letting your teammates on the Kansas City Chiefs down, and, of course, letting all Chiefs fans down as well. Would you please negotiate the extension of your contract with those considerations in mind? Please consider your teammates and fans.

Addendum September 8, 2023

Some of you likely know that Chris Jones sat in a private box high above Arrowhead Stadium last night as the Kansas City Chiefs lost, 21 to 20, to the Detroit Lions. I wonder whether Mr. Jones saw any Chiefs player wave up at him during the game, as if to say, “We’re with you as you hold out for more money, Chris. You’re looking all cool and relaxed up there, Man, while we’re working our butts off.  We know you’re making more money than most of us down here are, and we sure could use your help, Brother. But no worries. We’ve got your back.”

Do you think anything close to that happened?

Lose Weight and Become Healthier for $1,350/Month (or Free)

Posted on by Ken Goetz

Lose weight and become healthier for $1,350/month? Yep, you can do it, at least according to the preliminary results reported yesterday by Novo Nordisk on its drug, Wegovy, a drug that sets users back over a grand per month (Novo Nordisk funded the research study that has not yet been peer reviewed or published). Or maybe you can lose weight and become healthier for free. See below.

I’ll put on my medical hat now, as I occasionally do (see here). The reported results are hardly a surprise. It’s been known for years that so-called glucagon-like peptides-1 (Wegovy is a GLP-1 drug) reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in diabetic patients.

Reducing Obesity

Beyond that, GLP-1 drugs have been in the news lately because they reduce weight in obese patients. So, since it is well accepted that obesity is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, it’s hardly surprising that the Novo Nordisk study found its participants who received weekly injections of Wegovy had fewer heart attacks and strokes than the participants who received placebo injections.

What is new in this study is the population studied. Participants were all 45 years or older, and overweight (body mass index of at least 27), but they did not have diabetes. The key finding? The people receiving Wegovy had a 20% reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (heart attacks, strokes, and cardiovascular deaths), this coming from a population of over seventeen thousand subjects studied since 2018. So, assuming the data stand up when reviewed by peers, the results are convincing.

Press Release

I checked out the press release (you can see it here), and there is no mention of weight changes in any of the subjects, but almost surely those receiving Wegovy lost substantial weight.

The active compound in Wegovy is semaglutide (2.4 mg in each weekly injection). Semaglutide is also the active ingredient in Ozempic, a name that, if you watch any television, you’re familiar with, the drug that is now touted as a weight reduction wonder.

How do they work?

How do GLP-1 drugs work? They mimic the action of a hormone called glucagon-like peptide-1. As blood sugar levels rise after a meal, these drugs stimulate the production of insulin, which in turn lowers blood sugar levels. These drugs also curb hunger. The mechanism isn’t totally worked out, but they slow the movement of food out of the stomach into the intestines, giving the sensation of feeling full longer. Thus one eats less.

Plan B

Since evidence suggests that GLP-1 drugs lower a person’s weight by reducing caloric intake, here’s an alternate plan for you to consider. Rather than laying out some hefty dollars for Wegovy or Ozempic, or any of the GLP-1 drugs, why not consider the possibility of toughening your resolve and sticking to any of the weight-losing diets available? Lower your caloric intake and you will achieve the same happy results without laying out a boatload of cash. In short, lose weight and become healthier for free. Not only that, but you’ll avoid the side effects of Wegovy and Ozempic, the most common being nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea.

 

Oppenheimer, the Movie: A Blogger’s Review

Posted on by Ken Goetz
Oppenheimer, the Movie: A Blogger’s Review. Be forewarned! This is not a typical movie critic’s review (i.e., the refined opinion of someone who sees endless films weekly and thus is well attuned to the thunderous volumes and computer-generated enactments of most present-day movies. Rather, I offer a very brief opinion from the perspective of a guy with interest in J. Robert Oppenheimer, not to mention the continuing threat of nuclear war, a topic I’ve written about here before (see here).
 
I saw the movie yesterday. Thankfully I had heard the sound is LOUD, so I took along a pair of spongy ear plugs, my best decision of the day. Theaters tend to amp up the sound of everything these days, and Oppenheimer, clearly no exception, rumbles along at prodigious decibel levels most of the time. I popped in my plugs the moment the film started and kept them in for all but a couple of scenes when dialogue had dropped to almost the sound of normal characters talking.
 
Three story lines
The movie has essentially three story lines: 1) the rush to develop a nuclear bomb, with Oppenheimer placed in charge of the Los Alamos Laboratory that actually designed the bombs (to me the most interesting part of the story), 2) Oppenheimer’s background as a leftest and Communist sympathizer (which prompted the director to insert a couple of Oppenheimer’s intimate encounters, including one truly ridiculous clip when the physicist is suddenly shown in naked coitus with another women ([thanks to the supposed imagination of his wife]) as he is sitting at a table being interrogated about his political past by a partisan committee. Go figure!  3) the power politics of that time, with various characters struggling for position. One might possibly include here the philosophical and moral implications of devising nuclear weapons capable of destroying hordes of human lives.
 
Each of these story lines is chopped up and scattered through the three-hour film. The part dealing with the bomb’s development was for the most part handled well, but someone not familiar with particle physics, or some of the scientists portrayed, such as Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, and Edward Teller, probably would have trouble following some of the developments clearly. My main objection to this part of the film was the frequent screening of nothing but wavy lines and speeding particles, these accompanied by intensifying noises, but not advancing the story one jot. Perhaps the director thought jaws would drop in awe at the colorful whoopdeedo. Mine didn’t, but I grimaced after the second, third, and following arrivals of the increasingly benumbing  light show.
 
Wrap up
The thread of the second story line was handled, I thought, reasonably well, but the third one was overly long. Poor Oppenheimer was grilled by the malevolent committee for what seemed hours. This after the point was made clearly within a couple of minutes! Why numb the mind while making a simple point?
 
That’s it. One man’s opinion.  Some critics loved it.  See here  and here. Final reminder: If you decide to see Oppenheimer, consider taking along ear plugs.
 
 

 

 

 

Should Artificial Intelligence be your Doctor? A Warning

Posted on by Ken Goetz

Should artificial intelligence be your doctor? A warning for you. As I’ve mentioned here recently, AI is an amazing animal. As a “Chatbot,” AI can respond like a human with seemingly infinite knowledge. But to me AI is something of a murky creature facing an undefined future. Despite its eloquence, AI, in its ChatGPT form, is not infrequently wrong (see here, and here). If you would like a more detailed analysis of ChatGPT’s potential errors, a summary can be found here.

Earlier this month (6 July 2023) the Journal of the American Medical Association published online a series of articles on the risks and potential benefits of AI in health care. Below is an excerpt from the opening of one of the JAMA articles (AI Chatbots, Health Privacy, and Challenges to HIPAA Compliance). The article is largely free of medspeak, and the first three paragraphs telegraph the major theme of the article.

From JAMA

 As health care becomes more expensive and difficult to access, people turn to websites and smartphone apps for medical advice. These resources increasingly feature artificial intelligence (AI)–powered chatbots such as Google’s Bard and OpenAI’s ChatGPT.

Chatbots rely on large language models (LLMs), which are the next generation of internet search products. These tools have rekindled enthusiasm for AI-powered health care. Chatbot answers to health care questions often compare favorably to those of other medical resources. Moreover, chatbots can save time by taking on repetitive tasks that contribute to clinician burnout. However, the technology can cause significant harm. Large language models make frequent mistakes, tend to reflect the biases of their training data, and can manipulate people. In one instance, a user reportedly died by suicide after the software urged him to harm himself.

We are only beginning to understand the risks, including how chatbots threaten privacy. This Viewpoint examines the privacy concerns raised by medical uses of LLMs. We conclude that chatbots cannot comply with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in any meaningful way despite industry assurances. Even if they could, it would not matter because HIPAA is outdated and inadequate to address AI-related privacy concerns. Consequently, novel legal and ethical approaches are warranted, and patients and clinicians should use these products cautiously. (My emphasis)

Food for thought

Should Artificial Intelligence be your Doctor? The advice you receive may be erroneous, even dangerous. And your privacy may be compromised. I suggest you weigh the potential consequences carefully.

 

Two Odes to the Heart, by Artificial Intelligence

Posted on by Ken Goetz

Here are two odes to the heart written by that rapidly emerging poet (and soon to be anointed Poet Laureate of the World), Artificial Intelligence, or, as it prefers to be known by its common designation, AI. Each ode, AI might tell you modestly, was composed in a flash and printed out completely within a few seconds. As I posted here earlier, AI is mind-bending and thoroughly amazing, but at times astonishingly wrong (see here).

How did AI come to write the odes? I simply asked it by using ChatGPT on OpenAI.com (see here). Here is the exact prompt I gave ChatGPT to tell it what I wanted it to do:

Please write an ode to the heart, using rhyming poetry and praising this amazing organ for whatever factors you choose, but being sure to include its reliability, its muscular strength, it’s steadfast and rhythmic beating throughout an entire lifetime, and even include how it also functions as an endocrine gland. Please deal with these factors in whatever sequence you think is best. Perhaps you could end the poem with a stanza focusing on the heart’s popular association with love, composing that with a manner to make the reader smile.

And voila! An entire Ode to the Heart appeared on the monitor of my PC in an instant. I’ve pasted it below and added #1 to the title, because I greedily asked AI for a second ode. Please check out ode #1, and then I’ll comment on it.

 

Ode to the Heart #1

Oh, heart! O wondrous, beating core,
Reliable guardian at life’s door.
With strength of muscle pure and true,
Your rhythmic dance, a lifetime through.

From birth to dusk, you tirelessly beat,
A metronome of life’s vibrant feat.
Unyielding drum, a steadfast tune,
In sync with cycles, sun and moon.

A marvel that withstands the years,
Through joys and sorrows, hopes and fears,
Your faithful throb, an endless song,
A melody that keeps us strong.

Not just a pump, but more, you see,
An endocrine gland, or heart, you be!
You weave emotions into life’s art,
Releasing love, joy’s counterpart.

As hormones surge, enchanting dance,
In symphony, we find romance.
Your ventricles and chambers kind,
Unite two souls, true love to bind.

But let’s not forget, in every jest,
To treasure you, dear heart, with zest.
For though in love’s embrace you play,
You’re more than just emotions’ display.

Through valleys low and mountains tall,
You’re the anchor that keeps us all.
Reliable heart, so strong and true,
This ode to you, forever due.

And in this ode, we find our grace,
In beating hearts, we all embrace.
So let this twist bring forth a smile,
For hearts in live, go the extra mile.

Beyond romance and tender woo,
Our hearts unite, old and new.
From friendship’s bond to kinship’s art,
Love’s not just for a single heart.

For every heartbeat plays its part,
Together, love, we will impart.
In unison, let’s joyous be,
One heart, one love, eternally.

What do you think? For a poem written as fast as greased lightening, I think it’s not bad. Why did I ask ChatGPT to focus on the heart? Well, back in my working days I spent significant time investigating the heart, how its rate and strength of contraction are controlled, and, when Canadian scientists discovered somewhat surprisingly that the heart is also an endocrine organ, I studied what its hormone actually does. Despite what AI implies, when the heart’s hormone surges, it has nothing to do with romance. This hormone’s role is in regulating the circulatory system, not our reproductive system. That shouldn’t be a surprise.

So Ode #1 demonstrates one of AI’s glaring weaknesses. Although AI is unbelievably fast, and amazing in so many ways, it also can make colossal mistakes. Facts are not always one of its strong points. Still, if I were a poet, I think my knees would be shaking. Writers in general probably should be worried. I’m told that a novel written totally by AI was published recently.

As mentioned above, I went to the ChatGPT well again for a second dip, and just as fast came another Ode to the Heart. What do you think of this one? Again AI seems to “think,” if that’s the right word, that the heart’s hormone has a role in passion.

 

Ode to the Heart #2

Oh, wondrous heart, a marvel strong and true,
A rhythmic symphony, your beats construe,
Reliable and steadfast through the years,
A tireless guardian, allaying fears.

Within your chambers, muscular might,
You pump the crimson flow both day and night,
With every thump, a life’s journey sustains,
Enduring, unyielding, your love remains.

A marvel of design, with love entwined,
From birth to twilight years, a friend so kind,
In every pulse, a tale of life’s embrace,
A steady metronome, never to erase.

Oh, heart, you’re not just known for strength and grace,
A dual role you play, a hidden space,
An endocrine gland, you secret hormones share,
Emotions stirred, affection’s tender flare.

Through joy and sorrow, love’s enduring art,
You beat in time with every longing heart,
And when we find a love to call our own,
You flutter, dance, a rhythm all your own.

So, here’s to you, dear heart, for all you do,
For love, for strength, for life’s journey so true,
With every thump, you make us smile anew,
A symbol of love’s beat, forever and for you.

 

There you have it, a second ode to the heart, courtesy of AI. Does this one strike you as better than the first one above, or not? And now a more important question, I think. Can you imagine any danger that Artificial Intelligence might pose? Is it possible that this uncanny, and rapidly improving technique could be a danger? Is it possible that humans may lose their position on top of the food chain?

 

 

 

 

 

The Likely (and depressing) Biden-Trump Race

Posted on by Ken Goetz

Here’s an update on the likely (and depressing) Biden-Trump race. Prepare yourself. It’s not pretty.

The first primaries are just more than six months away, the first GOP debate is next month, and yet the only thing to be sure of is that clear and consistent majorities of Republicans, Democrats and independents don’t want the choice they’re likely to get, a race between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. So wrote Peggy Noonan in today’s weekend Wall Street Journal (July 8-9, 2023, see her article here).

As I indicated in my previous post, both men would do the country a huge favor by dropping out of the race (see that post here). In that essay I zeroed in on the contents inside their respective skulls, touching on Biden’s declining mind and Trump’s grating behavior when he was in office.

Biden’s mental acuity

I didn’t elaborate much beyond that, thinking it would be unkind to mention that Biden apparently wasn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer even when he was younger, for example when he was in law school. Although he once claimed he had graduated in the top half of his law school class, when he released his law school records, they revealed that he had graduated 76th in his class of 85 at Syracuse University College of Law.

And his years of decline are evident to practically everyone. As NBC News correspondent Jonathan Allen phrased it 2021: Age is catching up to Biden in the White House, adding his decline is alarming. He went on to highlight numerous instances of Biden’s gaffes and verbal slip-ups, incidents that have become even more common.

Trump’s erratic behavior

Nor did I elaborate on some of Trump’s more egregious behavior while he was our president, or after he left the office. Plenty has been said about his conduct. As The Guardian’s Richard Wolffe said in an op-ed a few years ago, It is important to recognize that Trump’s language is toxic, incendiary, and dangerous. It tears at the fabric of the republic.

Trump’s bizarre behavior has far-reaching effects, although he seems oblivious of them, or refuses to care about the consequences. Here’s how Peggy Noonan expressed the repercussions of his aggressive demeanor. His special superpower is that he is the only Republican who will unite and rally the Democratic base and drive independents away. He keeps the Biden coalition together.

Course of action?

So what might we concerned citizens do to derail the likely (and depressing) Biden-Trump race? What powers do we have? No matter which side of the political aisle we occupy, surely we can find better candidates than these two  ____________  (fill in the blank with the noun you think best describes them). If you are a party activist, or simply someone who thinks the person serving as our president should be alert, competent, and diplomatically tactful, express yourself.  Let’s demand someone better than our two (whatever you called them) who are bumbling along in the depressing Biden-Trump race.

Food for thought

Here’s a final tidbit from Peggy Noonan: If either party were daring and serious about history, it would shake off its front-runner and increase its chances of winning in 2024. 

An Urgent Appeal to President Biden and Former President Trump

Posted on by Ken Goetz

Dear President Biden and Former President Trump,

I am writing to appeal to your integrities, to your finest qualities. I am writing as a concerned citizen who deeply values the democratic process and our nation’s future. I am writing to kindly request that both of you withdraw from the upcoming presidential race.

In short, please drop out. Both of you! When I told others that I was planning this plea, every single person, regardless of political persuasion, urged me on, and with enthusiasm! Several even added sentences with Biden and Trump in the predicate.

I realize that this request may seem unconventional, but I believe it is a vital step for the well-being and unity of our country. Allow me to respectfully outline my reasons for this appeal.

President Biden

President Biden, I address this request to you first. It is apparent to many observers that your mental acuity has been diminishing over the course of your presidency. While it is natural for individuals to experience cognitive changes as they age, the demands of the presidency require sharpness, clarity, and the ability to make complex decisions. Anyone who has seen your misstatements and mental gaffes on TV, or has watched your aged movements, surely is aware of your mental and physical decline, as you yourself must be.

Dealing with the growing unrest between our country and China, to give one example, will require a leader who is mentally sharp and fully capable of navigating the nuances of international negotiations. By gracefully stepping aside from the upcoming election, you would prioritize the interests of the American people and ideally allow an individual with optimal mental capacity to lead our country.

Former President Trump

Former President Trump, I turn to you now. Throughout your presidency, your behavior at times deviated from the decorum and dignity traditionally associated with the office. Your often-vindictive rhetoric and inflammatory remarks have contributed to the divisiveness and polarization of our nation. If you were to return to office, one might fear that you would spend your time settling grudges rather than piloting our nation. I have lost count of how many former associates you have turned against.

By withdrawing from the upcoming election, you would not only demonstrate a commitment to fostering national unity but also allow for new voices and perspectives to emerge within your party. This would be an opportunity for the Republican Party to evolve and engage in a constructive dialogue that would move our nation forward. Certain programs you started might well come to fruition with new blood in the Oval Office.

Legal challenges for each of you

There is another important reason for both of you to withdraw from public life. Please consider the potential legal challenges that both of you might face. President Biden, it is no secret that investigations and legal inquiries surrounding your son, Hunter Biden, have generated significant public scrutiny. While it is not within my purview to determine guilt or innocence, the existence of these investigations creates distractions and questions that can hinder your ability to effectively govern and lead. By stepping aside from the election, you would allow for a fair and impartial resolution to these legal matters without the cloud of political implications.

Former President Trump, you too have faced legal challenges during and following your presidency. These include ongoing investigations into your financial dealings and potential conflicts of interest. Engaging in a presidential campaign while grappling with legal proceedings could further divide the nation and undermine the democratic process. By withdrawing from the upcoming election, you would provide the opportunity for these legal matters to be resolved impartially and independently, allowing the American people to have confidence in the integrity of our democratic institutions.

Unconventional  but sincere request

I understand that these requests may appear unconventional, but I hope both of you recognize the sincerity and concern with which they are made. Our nation is at a critical juncture, and we need leaders who can rise above personal ambitions and prioritize the well-being of our democracy. By stepping aside, both of you would create space for new candidates who can inspire unity, restore trust, and lead our nation with the clarity and dignity it deserves.

Because you both are experts at reading polls, you probably already know that a historic number of Americans dread a presidential race between you two (See the recent evidence here). Should my personal political leanings interest you, I consider myself to be a member of a vanishing species, a Jack Kennedy Democrat, as I described in my very first post on this blog (See that post here). This of course puts me somewhat to the right of the leftward shifted political mid-line, but I continue to judge candidates closely and make my ultimate decision on what each candidate supports, not on party affiliation.

Finally, as I think you already know, this letter is not intended as an attack on either of your characters, or an invalidation of your achievements. It is an appeal for selfless leadership, which I urge each of you to exhibit by withdrawing from the presidential race. Please take my recommended action so headlines across the nation will read:

Biden and Trump Drop Out!

 

Artificial Intelligence is often Wrong

Posted on by Ken Goetz

Yes, artificial intelligence (AI) is often wrong. Admittedly, this digital wunderkind can spout smooth sentences with amazing ease, but its results cannot be trusted. If you’re looking for facts, say by using an AI chatbot such as ChatGPT, watch out! (A chatbot is a computer program that uses AI to answer questions in verbal form, thus mimicking a human response.) If you would like to learn more about using ChatGPT, basic information can be found by clicking here.

The frequent misstatements of facts by AI have been publicized for some time, but thanks to my son, Greg, I now have a personal example of how distorted a response from ChatGPT can be. As an experiment, Greg asked ChatGPT to provide a positive review of my most recent post at writerken.com, the one I had titled What are the Dangers of Artificial Intelligence?. ChatGPT fired back in quick order and gave a glowing account of the post.

Facile prose

In facile prose, ChatGPT claimed to have read my post. It offered soothing and complimentary agreement on what I had written. But the entire job was phony baloney. It praised me for arguments I hadn’t made. In a curious way, the entire result reminded me of words coming out of the mouth of a Washington politician, that being a blast of self-serving hot air. Check it out. Here’s the chatbot’s entire response to Greg’s request:

AI speaks
 
I recently came across the blog post on writerken.com discussing the dangers of AI, and I must say it was a thought-provoking read. I wholeheartedly agree with the points made regarding the potential risks associated with the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence.
 
One of the key concerns highlighted in the blog post is the issue of job displacement. As AI technology continues to improve, there is a genuine worry that certain jobs may become obsolete, leading to unemployment and economic inequality. This is an important aspect to consider as we embrace the benefits of AI, and it is crucial that we develop strategies to retrain and reskill individuals who may be impacted by automation.
 
Ethical implications
 
Additionally, the ethical implications of AI are something that we cannot overlook. As AI systems become more complex and autonomous, there is a need for transparency and accountability in their decision-making processes. We must ensure that AI algorithms are not biased, discriminatory, or prone to manipulation. Striving for fairness and ethical responsibility in AI development is essential for building a future where technology serves humanity’s best interests.
 
Another significant concern raised in the blog post is the potential loss of human connection and empathy in a world increasingly driven by AI. While AI can undoubtedly enhance our lives in numerous ways, it should never replace the richness and depth of human interaction. It is crucial to strike a balance between leveraging AI for efficiency and innovation while preserving the essential human qualities that make us unique.
 
Applause for my blog
 
Overall, I applaud the writerken.com blog for shedding light on the dangers of AI and fostering important discussions. It is essential that we approach the development and deployment of AI with a responsible mindset, ensuring that its benefits are maximized while mitigating any potential risks. By staying informed and actively engaging in these conversations, we can collectively shape a future where AI serves as a powerful tool for progress and positive change.
 
My blog contradicts

If you haven’t read my post on the dangers of AI, you can find it by clicking here. My major point was that AI conceivably could lead to the extinction of human life, an eye-popping worry. After all, over 300 eminent experts had raised this alarm, as had countless others. But this monster point was unmentioned by ChatGPT. A colossal failure! (ChatGPT had been fed countless gigabytes of data, but obviously not my specific blot post). On the other hand, the chatbot patted me on the shoulder for raising issues I had not mentioned, those of job displacement and the loss of human empathy.

This is not to say that chatbots cannot be amazingly creative. They are accomplished writers of poetry and even novels, forms in which reality need not exist, and usually doesn’t. Recent reports indicate that Amazon’s Kindle store is being flooded with books written by ChatGPT. This brings up another looming danger of AI, and specifically of chatbots like ChatGPT (and one that ChatGPT credited me for saying, so I’ll get to that now). Chatbots might, and very likely will, put countless writers out of work, especially those contracted as writers for corporations to compose letters, advertising content, and miscellaneous company publications. A sad result.

Take home message

My take home message today is clear. Artificial intelligence is often wrong, sometimes spectacularly so. Somehow that comforts me.

Final observations:

I’ve noticed that readers rarely click on my links, such as when I refer to another website, or when I link back to earlier posts I’ve written on this site. I guarantee that these are not teasers designed to get you into trouble, nor are they in any way profitable to me. Rather they simply are trusted sources that I have found to be valuable as additional sources of information.

Stay tuned. I may go on a political rampage next. I’ve even got two obvious targets in mind.

 

What are the Dangers of Artificial Intelligence?

Posted on by Ken Goetz

What are the dangers of artificial intelligence? Will AI extinguish human life? Could AI wipe out civilization as we know it? A crowd of experts assert that it could. You’ve probably read the stories over the past couple of days. An outfit called the Center for AI Safety (a San Francisco-based organization that few know anything about) published a 22 word statement that echoed around the globe. The statement was signed by over 300 notables, including a good number of leading AI specialists. If you missed it, here is the statement, in its entirety:

“Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”

Pandemics

Does this sound serious to you? It does to me. Pandemics haven’t extinguished us, but they’ve tried. They’ve wiped out millions of people. Covid killed something like 7 million worldwide, but that death rate was relatively puny when compared with the bubonic plague that killed over 20 million Europeans (over a third of the entire population) in the mid-14th Century (see here for details).

Nuclear War

And nuclear war? Well, if you’re aware of the power of the present-day nuclear weapons, you know that one single bomb could destroy any city on earth, and the resulting radiation, which causes radiation sickness, could kill many more. (If you haven’t read Neville Shute’s On The Beach, now is the time.) That novel describes the final days of the world’s remaining survivors after an atomic war. And it was published in 1958, when nuclear arms were primitive compared with today’s killers.)

AI is nothing less than mind-boggling. Its “brain” includes the entire digital world. Its computing capacity has solved equations in seconds that humans would have taken years to solve, if ever. And AI talks with us. It writes articles for us. Siri, a relatively low level form of AI on our iPhones, finds information for us instantly, and reports it to us.

A Big Question

So here’s the big question. Is AI sentient? Or could it become sentient? If you happened to see 2001: A Space Odyssey, you may have a chilling suspicion that computers can become “human” in their thinking. One of the characters in that movie is a large computer, HAL 9000, who speaks with a soothing male voice and has a camera to observe “his” surrounds. He also is proud, egotistical, and dangerous. (By the way, HAL was cleverly named. Just move down the alphabet one letter from H, A, and L, and you will come up with the name of a famed computer company.)

It truly is worth considering that AI, if it is sentient, or if it would become so, with its clear ability to out-think any human brain, has the wherewithal to become our master, or our killer, perhaps via the building of robots to wage war against us. Am I dabbling in science fiction? Maybe. Maybe not. The necessary tools are already in place.

Is Siri Sentient?

At times, I have a feeling that even what Apple calls my private assistant, Siri, is sentient. “She” at times refused to obey my commands. One of her favorite tricks is to refuse to speak to me when I am using her for driving directions. Her map appears on my iPhone, but Siri remains stubbornly silent more often than not, even when I patiently ask her to speak.

So, will artificial intelligence extinguish human life? Not, I believe, in the years I have remaining.

Finally

One final point about that 22 word statement printed above. Please note that the statement does not include global warming among its societal scale risks, a point I made earlier in another context. Click here to see that post.