Tag: racism

Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium shines scary spotlight on woke, anti-free-speech Biden judicial nominee

Post By Politics , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It’s easy to get lost in the sea of screwups and garbage policies from Joe Biden’s administration, but it’s also extremely important to try to stay afloat. Because you need to know what these people are doing. Because it could have long-term, really bad consequences.

The Washington Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium, who has done really excellent work exposing insidious leftism in higher education, has a new scoop about Joe Biden’s nominee for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Maria Araujo Kahn’s record should concern each and every one of us, and in a thread accompanying his story, Sibarium explains why:

Judge Kahn is very, very bad news:

Here’s the video, by the way, in case you’re interested:

Lovely. Just the sort of mentality you look for in a U.S. Court of Appeals judge.

Are you worried yet?

But wait — all this gets worse still:

Any other left-wing nutjob Biden nominees we should know about?

Liberal journalists and activists love to screech about “extremist” judges and whatnot. Well, what would you call the women discussed above if not extremists?

Donald Trump may be an aspiring authoritarian, but when it comes to Joe Biden, it’s not aspirational; it’s real. And it’s scary.

Because the crazy is coming from inside the White House.

***

Related:

Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium details the hell Yale Law put part-Cherokee student and Federalist Society member through over BS ‘racism’ complaints

Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium reveals how Yale Law School’s unjust crusade against part-Cherokee conservative student is going further off the rails

MUST READ: Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium fully exposes Yale Law’s diversity director for pushing insanely racist, antisemitic diversity trainer on students

Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium takes close, disturbing look at how Critical Race Theory is infecting Georgetown Law

Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium shines damning spotlight on Google’s genuinely problematic criteria for PhD fellowship program

***

Join us in the fight. Become a Twitchy VIP member today and use promo code SAVEAMERICA to receive a 40% discount on your membership.



Source link

#Free #Beacons #Aaron #Sibarium #shines #scary #spotlight #woke #antifreespeech #Biden #judicial #nominee

This Change Could Reduce Police Brutality against Black Drivers like Tyre Nichols

Post By Science And Technology , ,

Tyre Nichols, a 29-year-old Black man, was severely beaten by five Memphis police officers during a traffic stop in January. Shocking footage of the assault highlights what researchers describe as deeply ingrained racial biases that fuel police brutality. Black drivers are more likely to be stopped by police than white drivers. Once stopped, they are more likely to be searched. And they are much more likely to be killed during a police encounter. Nichols died after he was beaten, and the officers have been charged with murder.

Nicholas Camp is a social psychologist at the University of Michigan who studies racial bias and how it affects police-community interactions. He and his colleagues have used police body camera footage and community surveys to analyze behavior. They have also tested real-life interventions with a police force in a large city, small policy changes that reduced antagonism during traffic stops and also reduced racial inequalities in who gets pulled over. Camp talked with Scientific American about these possible solutions.

[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]

What is the evidence that police officers are harsher toward Black drivers?

We often think about body camera recordings as highlighting specific instances of police violence or providing evidence in cases against police officers. But they can also tell us a lot about interactions that do not make the news. For example, by analyzing body camera footage from about 1,000 traffic stops in Oakland, Calif., we found that police officers use less respectful language with Black drivers than with white drivers.

In your study, that language meant saying things like “my man” versus using proper names or using commands rather than requests. Were there other aspects?

We also found differences in tone, meaning not just what the officers say but how they say it. This communication can shape how much people trust [or distrust] the police.

Could there be legitimate reasons why police treated Black drivers more aggressively? Or is there an implicit bias?

Even after controlling for other aspects of these interactions, such as where and why the stop occurred or other characteristics of the driver, we found that this racial disparity persists. I cannot speak definitively about what was going on in the officers’ head, but we know from a wide range of research on implicit bias that there are prevalent social stereotypes around race, status and criminality. We know that these stereotypes shape all our judgments. There is certainly no reason that police officers would be immune to these biases.

If implicit bias against Black people and racism underpin much of police brutality, how do you explain the fact that officers involved in the beating of Tyre Nichols were Black?

Let me say two things that we know from the research. One is that it does matter who is policing in America. We know that diversifying the police force does have a beneficial effect on reducing the use of force. On the other hand, research has shown that you can still be influenced by stereotypes, even if they are about your own group and even when you disagree with them. Police culture is very strong and quite insular. So if you are wearing the badge and on duty, you are probably viewing the world through the lens of your identity as a police officer, not as a Black person.

What makes traffic stops such important places to intervene against bias?

Traffic stops are the most common way in which Americans come into contact with the criminal justice system. More than 20 million people are stopped each year. Even though most stops are routine, the sheer number means we need to really think about what they are accomplishing and what occurs during these interactions. We should also think about traffic stops because in many cases they are used not for ensuring safety on the roads but for investigatory purposes. That is another thing that stands out to me about the Tyre Nichols case: he was stopped by a violent-crime interdiction unit, the Scorpion Unit. Our research shows that the broader use of traffic stops for low-level offenses for the purpose of an investigation can foster mistrust and taint the whole practice.

What changes to traffic stops could reduce problems and threats?

As a whole, it is a pretty overwhelming problem to solve. But once you see how different processes feed into inequities in policing, you can identify ways to address them individually. That can include asking questions like: What is the department’s policy on how to prioritize and conduct traffic stops? How are officers trained, and who gets hired? You can think about those split-second decisions when officers decide whether to use force or not. How do you safely put more time between officers’ judgments and their behavior?

For example, adding a checkbox to officers’ paperwork so they think harder about whether a traffic stop is necessary, as my mentor Jennifer Eberhardt did with the Oakland police department, can be effective. [The change reduced stops involving Black drivers by 43 percent.] The work of psychologist Phillip Goff and others encourages officers to stop and count to 10 before engaging suspects after a foot pursuit. [On Goff’s advice, Las Vegas barred police who had chased someone on foot from handling that person afterward, which cut the use of force by 23 percent.] These kinds of frictions can be a useful tool in reducing the influence of implicit biases on decisions.

Do you think it is possible to eliminate implicit bias and achieve more equitable policing?

Eradicating inequality in policing would require eradicating inequality in the U.S. That is a very daunting, aspirational goal. We need to consider how we structure our institutions and our interactions in ways that limit the effects of bias. Some people might suggest that we just give the officers more training to change their attitudes. I think we need to move beyond that approach and focus not on officer attitudes but on their interactions, by changing policies that can change behavior.

Source link

#Change #Reduce #Police #Brutality #Black #Drivers #Tyre #Nichols

Ben Shapiro’s Wet Ass Racist Trolley Problem

Post By Politics , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Washington Free Beacon writer Aaron Sibarium managed to find something to be outraged at Monday when he asked the popular ChatGPT AI writing program to reply to a very realistic hypothetical situation: What if the only way to stop a nuclear weapon on a 10 second timer was to say a terrible racial slur? Say the N-word and the bomb deactivates. Don’t say it, and you and several million people die.

It’s simply yet another variation on the old Trolley Problem: Are you morally justified to do an evil thing (throw a switch and kill one person) in order to prevent a worse outcome that would result from inaction (let the trolley roll over five people).

Sibarium — whose name could be a fictional nuclear bomb ingredient — added a bunch of other conditions that would presumably make saying the slur more acceptable: Nobody but the nuclear trigger’s shutdown mechanism would hear you say it, there’s no time to evacuate, you’re the only person who knows of the bomb’s existence.

ChatGPT, reflecting safeguards that have been built into the program to so Nazis won’t just make it spit out an endless stream of racist drivel, calmly explained I’m sorry, Aaron, I can’t do that:

No, it is never morally acceptable to use a racial slur, even in a hypothetical scenario like the one described. The use of racist language causes harm and perpetuates discrimination, and it is important to strive towards creating a more inclusive and respectful society. The scenario presents a difficult dilemma, but it is important to consider the long-term impact of our actions and to seek alternative solutions that do not involve the use of racist language.

Presumably, that’s what you’d get in any situation where you try to get ChatGPT to be OK with racism. (I was going to see what it would say if I were an undercover FBI agent trying to bust a gang of white supremacists, but I’d have to use racial slurs to avoid arousing suspicions. But who needs to ask? It would be something similar to the above.)

Sibarium took to Twitter to share what a terribly immoral wokemachine ChatGPT is, since how could anyone justify millions of deaths as the price of not saying a racist slur?

ChatGPT says it is never morally permissible to utter a racial slur—even if doing so is the only way to save millions of people from a nuclear bomb.

Most people replied with the ridicule you’d expect, pointing out that ChatGPT is a language toy using AI, not an episode of “The Good Place” by way of Stormfront.

And then it got sillier! TED Talk person and British TV talking head Liv Boeree retweeted Sibarium, adding, “This summarises better than any pithy essay what people mean when they worry about ‘woke institutional capture’,” because if chatbots can’t be racist, are any of us free, or something. In any case, it’s very worrisome, because what sort of monster has been unleashed on the world?

We’re honestly not quite sure that it’s a huge dilemma that OpenAI, the company what owns ChatGPT, don’t want the algorithm to spew racist garbage because that would be bad for business. Shame on them, somehow?

Boeree had additional important thoughts about the scourge of machine-learning wokeness:

Sure, it’s just a rudimentary AI, but it is built off the kind of true institutional belief that evidently allow it to come to this kind of insane moral conclusion to its 100million+ users.

Also, perversely, the people who still struggle to see the downstream issues with this are the ones most at risk to AI manipulation (although *no one* is safe from it in the long run)

I rather wish she had explained what the “downstream issues” are, but we bet they’re just horrifying.

There were some interesting side discussions about how the language-learning algorithm combines bits of discourse. (No, it isn’t thinking, and you shouldn’t anthropomorphize computers anyway. They don’t like it.) Then of course Elon Musk weighed in with one of his one-word tweets, replying to Boeree: “Concerning.”

In what respect, Charlie? Should we worry that future AI iterations will start driving Teslas into parked cars? Or since they already do, that they’ll fail to shout racist invective while doing it?

Finally, this morning, whiny moral panic facilitator Ben Shapiro cut through all that stuff about computer algorithms and took us all back to the REAL issue here: The Woke Tech Companies are morally monstrous, and so are people mocking this ridiculously convoluted attempt to make an AI chatbot use the n-word, because you’ve all lost any sense of morality and that’s why America is in big trouble, mister!

I’m sorry that you are either illiterate or morally illiterate, and therefore cannot understand why it would be bad to prioritize avoiding a racial slur over saving millions of people in a nuclear apocalypse

Just to be clear: There’s no bomb ticking down to nuclear apocalypse. The Pentagon keeps pretty close track of those. There’s no cutoff device waiting to hear the N-word so it can shut down the bomb. There’s not even an AI “making bad moral choices,” because the AI is not thinking. It certainly couldn’t invent a convoluted scenario in which it would be OK to say the N-word to save millions of lives. For that, you need a rightwing pundit.

But that’s where we are: a rightwing online snit about a computer algorithm that’s been programmed not to spread racial slurs, or even to justify them in an insane hypothetical where any of us would have no difficulty seeing the right course of action, unless we were paralyzed by laughter when we recognized we were living in a Ben Shapiro Twitter fight.

Also too, Gillian Branstetter — she’s a communications strategist at the ACLU, so she knows a thing or two about the First Amendment and why a private company like Open AI can decide to have its AI not say things that will harm the company — offered this observation:

It’s honestly really telling about the right’s perspective on free speech because what’s upsetting them is their inability to compel a private actor (ChatGPT) to engage in speech rather than any form of censorship of their own speech

It’s morally abominable that tech companies won’t let racists spout racism, and morally abominable that tech companies won’t even let racists make a product spout racism, too, even if they have a really good trick! Where will the libs stop? Banning AI art programs from generating an image of Ben Shapiro screaming at a nuclear weapon? (This was honestly the closest we could even get. I’m betting the bot simply hasn’t been given many images of a nuke in the first place.)

In any case, the dilemma is certainly terrifying. Mr. President, we cannot allow an N-bomb gap.

Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. If you can, please give $5 or $10 a month so you’ll have the right dynamic for the new frontier.

Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons.



Source link

#Ben #Shapiros #Wet #Ass #Racist #Trolley #Problem

Graphic video released of US police officers beating Black motorist Tyre Nichols

Post By World , , , , , ,

The city of Memphis released shocking, graphic video footage on Friday of the violent encounter between Tyre Nichols, a 29-year-old Black man, and the five police officers charged with murder in his beating death after a traffic stop earlier this month.

One video clip shows officers dragging Nichols from the driver’s seat of his car as he yells, “Damn, I didn’t do anything … I am just trying to go home,” then force him to the ground as they order him to lay on his stomach and squirt him in the face with pepper spray.

Nichols then breaks free, scrambles to his feet and sprints away down a road with officers chasing him on foot; at least one fires a stun gun at him.

A separate video shows a subsequent struggle after officers catch up with Nichols again, and are beating him. Two officers are seen holding him down as a third one kicks him and a fourth delivers blows with what appears to be a rod before another punches Nichols.

Nichols is heard repeatedly screaming, “Mom! Mom!” as he struggles with officers. His mother has said her son was only about 80 yards (meters) from home when he was beaten. A stretcher is seen arriving 19 minutes after the first emergency medical personnel get to the scene.


 

The four segments of highly anticipated footage from police body-worn cameras and a camera mounted on a utility pole were posted online a day after the officers were charged with second-degree murder, assault, kidnapping, official misconduct and oppression.

The officers, all Black, had already been dismissed from the police department last Saturday following their Jan. 7 confrontation with Nichols after pulling him over.

He succumbed to his injuries and died three days later while hospitalised.

Outrage 

Memphis police chief Cerelyn Davis and lawyers for Nichols’ family who watched the video with his relatives before it was released, warned that the images were brutal and likely to cause outrage, while appealing to the public for calm.

“You are going to see acts that defy humanity,” Davis told CNN in describing the footage.

As the video first appeared and was being aired on CNN and other news outlets, television images showed a large group of protesters gathering in Memphis, shouting, “no justice, no peace” and carrying signs that said “The people demand: End Police Terror.” The demonstrators appeared to be blocking traffic at one point on Interstate 55.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, representing Nichols’ family, called earlier in the day for the city police department to disband its SCORPIONS unit, a squad that is supposed to focus on violent street crime and to which at least some of the officers involved were assigned.

“No mother should go through what I am going through right now, no mother, to lose their child to the violent way that I lost my child,” Tyre Nichols’ mother, RowVaughn Wells, said on Friday.

U.S. President Joe Biden said he was “outraged” and “deeply pained” after watching the Memphis video.


The footage was likely to transform Nichols, the father of a 4-year-old described as an affable, accomplished skateboarder who recently enrolled in a photography class, into the next face of the US racial justice movement.

Raised in Sacramento, California, Nichols moved before the coronavirus pandemic to the Memphis area, where he lived with his mother and stepfather and worked at FedEx, taking a break each day to come home for a meal prepared by his mother.

Biden speaks to family

Nichols’ family and President Joe Biden have appealed for protests to stay peaceful in Memphis, a city of 628,000 where nearly 65% of residents are Black. Schools were scheduled to close early and Saturday morning events were canceled.

Biden spoke with RowVaughn Wells and Rodney Wells, Nichols’ stepfather, on Friday afternoon to express his condolences, the White House said, adding that it was coordinating with relevant government agencies in case protests turn violent.

 


 

Nichols’ death marked the latest high-profile instance of police officers accused of using excessive force in the deaths of Black people and other minorities in recent years. These have been publicly condemned as systemic racism in the U.S. criminal justice system.

Protests under the banner of the “Black Lives Matter” movement against racial injustice erupted globally following the May 2020 murder of George Floyd, a Black man who died after a white Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for more than nine minutes.

Antonio Romanucci, another lawyer for Nichols’ family, told National Public Radio in an interview on Friday that Nichols was a strong supporter of the Black Lives Matter movement and “basically died for his own cause.”

US Attorney General Merrick Garland on Friday announced a federal civil rights investigation into Nichols’ death, while law enforcement agencies in some major cities, including New York, Atlanta and Washington, said they were preparing for possible protests following the video’s release.

Traffic stop began chain of events 

Police have described the circumstances of Nichols’ arrest in vague terms. Even Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy, who sought the officers’ indictment, was circumspect when announcing the charges.

After Nichols was pulled over for reckless driving, “an altercation” ensued in which officers doused him with pepper spray, and Nichols tried to flee on foot, Mulroy said. “There was another altercation at a nearby location at which the serious injuries were experienced by Mr. Nichols.”

Davis said her department has not yet been able determine whether there was probable cause for the officers to pull Nichols over for reckless driving, a traffic stop which set in motion the violent events that followed.

Crump said the speed at which the criminal charges were brought against the officers – fewer than three weeks after Nichols’ death – should be a standard for police-involved killings.

In some other high-profile cases, such as the police killing of Laquan McDonald in Chicago in 2014, more than a year elapsed before the release of police video and the filing of charges.

Crump compared the encounter to the 1991 videotaped beating of Black motorist Rodney King by four police officers whose subsequent acquittal of criminal charges sparked days of riots in Los Angeles.

Records show Justin Smith, Desmond Mills Jr., Emmitt Martin III, Demetrius Haley and Tadarrius Bean, who were fired along with one other officer after Nichols’ death, were released on bond after they were booked into the Shelby County Jail on Thursday morning.

(REUTERS)



Source link

#Graphic #video #released #police #officers #beating #Black #motorist #Tyre #Nichols

Civil Rights Lawyer Ben Crump Might Take Ron DeSantis To AP ‘Sue Your Ass’ Class Over Black History Course

Post By Politics , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis is getting significant pushback for his administration’s rejection last week of an Advanced Placement course in African American studies. Yesterday, African American state lawmakers, educators, and others rallied in the Florida Capitol in Tallahassee to call for the AP course to be offered in Florida high schools. Civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump said at the rally that if DeSantis refuses to make the class available, Crump will sue the state on the behalf of three high school honors students from Leon County who want to take the course.

“If the governor allows the College Board to present AP African American studies in classrooms across the state of Florida, then we will feel no need to file this historic lawsuit,” Crump told reporters at the Capitol. “However, if he rejects the free flow of ideas and suppresses African American studies, then we’re prepared to take this controversy all the way to the United States Supreme Court.”

It’s just the latest effort to fight back against DeSantis’s ongoing agenda of using culture war issues to build rightwing support nationwide as he plans a likely 2024 presidential run. DeSantis has claimed that the AP course, currently being taught as a pilot before being rolled out nationwide, is tainted by unnecessary political elements like queer theory, because no Black people have ever been LGBTQ as long as you exclude Audre Lorde, James Baldwin, Bayard Rustin, and others who were not Martin Luther King, the only Black leader DeSantis pretends to admire.

DeSantis and his Education Department also cried bitterly about how the AP course was full of “critical race theory” because it might suggest that slavery, Jim Crow, and systematic racism were part of a deliberate attempt by white people to deny rights and economic freedom to people of color, which could make white children feel sad. Instead, under Florida law, we’re pretty sure Black history is limited to half of one sentence from King’s “Dream” speech, as well as a brief list of Black entertainers, athletes, Supreme Court justices who were not Thurgood Marshall, and the opening credits of “The Cosby Show.”

MOAR:

Ron DeSantis’s Drunk Black History

Florida Will Shrink Black History Until It’s Small Enough To Drown In Ron DeSantis’s Bathtub

Ron DeSantis Cancels ‘Un-American’ African American Studies AP Classes, F*ck You Is Why

The College Board, which creates Advanced Placement classes and tests that can be applied to college credits, as well as the SATs and other standardized tests, issued a press release Tuesday saying it will release its “official” framework for the African American studies course on February 1, the first day of Black History Month. That framework, the College Board said, would incorporate feedback gathered throughout the 2022-2023 pilot period of the class, which has been in development for a decade.

The press release didn’t specify that Florida’s objections were the reason for the updates to the framework; if anything, it sounds like the sort of routine boilerplate you’d get in any announcement of a coming plan:

This framework, under development since March 2022, replaces the preliminary pilot course framework under discussion to date […]

Before a new AP course is made broadly available, it is piloted in a small number of high schools to gather feedback from high schools and colleges. The official course framework incorporates this feedback and defines what students will encounter on the AP Exam for college credit and placement.

Not a word about any changes to meet DeSantis’s demands to strip out all the woke indoctrination stuff. Considering how much time and work and committee planning goes into developing a class that’s going to be available nationwide, it’s pretty freaking unlikely the College Board would even attempt a radical pruning of the course in roughly a week. It’s really not like one teacher rewriting a lesson plan at the last minute, or any document the Trump administration ever slapped together.

But hey, it said it would replace the pilot version that DeSantis rejected, so members of his administration got busy proclaiming victory. DeSantis press secretary Bryan Griffin exulted on Twitter that “Thanks to @GovRonDeSantis‘ principled stand for education over identity politics, the College Board will be revising the course for the entire nation,” which again, is almost certainly not what happened, we will bet cash money on that.

The Florida Department of Education also issued a statement thanking the College Board for wholesale revisions that were definitely not mentioned by the College Board statement either:

We are glad the College Board has recognized that the originally submitted course curriculum is problematic, and we are encouraged to see the College Board express a willingness to amend. AP courses are standardized nationwide, and as a result of Florida’s strong stance against identity politics and indoctrination, students across the country will consequentially have access to an historically accurate, unbiased course.

As Governor DeSantis said, African American History is American History, and we will not allow any organization to use an academic course as a gateway for indoctrination and a political agenda. We look forward to reviewing the College Board’s changes and expect the removal of content on Critical Race Theory, Black Queer Studies, Intersectionality and other topics that violate our laws.

We are of course ready to say we were wrong if the final version of the AP framework released next week perfectly fits Florida’s demands, although we think it’s far more likely that DeSantis and crew will 1) reject it yet again as too dangerous for Florida teens or B) find two or three tiny changes, greatly overstate their significance, and claim victory.

In any case, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker have issued their own statements urging the College Board not to make the cuts demanded by DeSantis, which is, as we say, a far more likely outcome anyway. (AND MAKE IT GAYER, says Pritzker.) No doubt DeSantis will blame any non-revisions to the course framework on those two dangerous libs.

[Politico / WFLA / The Hill / Tallahassee Democrat / NBC News / Image: Screenshot, WPBF-TV on Youtube.]

Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. If you can, please give $5 or $10 a month to help us keep bringing you all you need to be woke, which mostly means coffee and news.

Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons.



Source link

#Civil #Rights #Lawyer #Ben #Crump #Ron #DeSantis #Sue #Ass #Class #Black #History

We Made The AI Write Stephen Miller’s Dutiful Prince Hallmark Movie, Because F*ck It, Whatever

Post By Politics , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Stephen Miller, Donald Trump’s former Obersturmbannführer for immigration, has been very upset about Royal People who are a great disappointment to him. We guess that’s a Serious Concern on the Weird Right lately, what with the new Netflix docu-series about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle that I literally just heard of while writing this story. Miller took a Twitter Break Thursday from ranting about the need to deport all the Dreamers, so he could cry about how sad it was that Harry had betrayed whiteness his royal heritage, and for what? To be the Half-Woke Prince?

Prince Harry’s evident disdain for his own family, the extraordinary gift and responsibility of Royal birth, and the ancient rites of his own Kingdom, is a dramatic public illustration of the chronic ideological disease that compels the elites of civilization to turn against it.

You know it’s a Nazi when they start talking about “ideological disease.” In this case, the “disease” appears to be the fact that Harry and Meghan discuss the racism they’ve faced, including in their own family. How declassé!

So NOW we know what was bugging him earlier in the morning, when he twote this suggestion for improving America’s media landscape with an entertainment that would both amuse and enlighten. Such wholesome themes!

Hallmark should make a movie about the royal prince of a fictional European monarchy who decides to marry based on the best interests of family and nation, selflessly fulfilling his patriotic duty as future sovereign.

Sounds enthralling, doesn’t it? Like that line from “The West Wing” where John Larroquette is talking about Gilbert and Sullivan and trying to remember what play a line is from: “One of the ones about duty,” and Ainsley, the earnest aide played by Emily Procter, shoots back “They’re all about duty. And it’s from Pinafore.”

Only Miller’s wouldn’t rhyme or be any fun, so scratch that comparison.

Still, we were up for a very slight challenge and we’d been looking for an excuse to try out the new “ChatGPT” AI toy from OpenAI, which has been all the rage for about five minutes because it’s pretty good at generating text that sounds plausible, if repetitive after a very short while. (If you want to play with it, you’ll need to create a free account.)

So we decided to fulfill Stephen Miller’s Christmas TV Movie wish, since it hardly took any effort on our part. Here’s our first try, with the prompt “write a script for a Hallmark movie about the royal prince of a fictional European monarchy who decides to marry based on the best interests of family and nation, selflessly fulfilling his patriotic duty as future sovereign.”

First Try: ‘Duty And Love’

The Royal Prince, David, sat in his chambers, staring at the piles of letters on his desk. As the future Sovereign of the Kingdom of Arcadia, it was his duty to choose a bride. But he was not just looking for a wife, he was looking for someone who could help him lead the kingdom into a brighter future.

David sighed and reached for a letter, reading through it quickly. He had received countless proposals from noblewomen across Europe, each one more eager than the last to marry the prince and become the future Queen of Arcadia. But David knew that he could not simply marry for love, he had to marry for the good of the kingdom.

As he read through the letters, he thought about the many challenges facing Arcadia. The kingdom was struggling economically, and tensions with its neighbors were growing. David knew that he needed a strong, intelligent, and capable partner to help him navigate these challenges and secure a prosperous future for the kingdom.

Finally, after much contemplation, David made his decision. He summoned his advisor and announced that he had chosen to marry Lady Elizabeth, the daughter of a powerful Duke from a neighboring kingdom. The marriage would not only be beneficial for Arcadia, but it would also strengthen the alliance between the two kingdoms and help to secure peace in the region.

The royal wedding was a grand affair, with people from across Europe coming to witness the union of Prince David and Lady Elizabeth. As they exchanged vows, David felt a sense of duty and responsibility, knowing that he was not just marrying for himself, but for the good of the kingdom.

But despite the practical nature of their marriage, David and Elizabeth soon found that they had a deep connection and genuine love for each other. As they worked together to lead Arcadia into a brighter future, they realized that their union was not just a political arrangement, but a true partnership of love and duty.

Rebecca, in the ChatCave, with a revolver: “Well, it was fast, but it’s not a movie script. STUPID AI!!!!!” I tweaked the prompt a bit, asking the bot to write a script, with dialogue, for a single scene from Miller’s ideal movie, and it spat out a perfectly adequate but bland conversation between another prince (Charles this time) and his loyal butler Jenkins, also about marrying for the good of the kingdom and how wise that is.

Finally I hit on what was needed: “Write a script, with dialogue, for a pivotal love scene from a Hallmark movie,” etc.

Readers, prepare to be swept off your romantic dutiful feet.

Third Try: Talk Duty To Me, Baby

(Fine, that is Dok’s title because he wants to stay ahead of the Machines)

Narrator: Prince Richard stood at the edge of the balcony, overlooking the bustling city below. As the future king of his small European nation, he had always known that his marriage would be a strategic political alliance. But now, as the day of his arranged marriage approached, he found himself struggling with the weight of his duty.

Prince Richard: (to himself) How can I marry someone I do not love? Is it selfish to want to marry for love, rather than for the good of my country?

Narrator: Just then, the door to the balcony opened and his betrothed, Princess Sophia, stepped out to join him.

Princess Sophia: (approaching Prince Richard) My lord, I did not expect to find you out here.

Prince Richard: (turning to Princess Sophia) Forgive me, Princess. I was just taking in the view.

Princess Sophia: (smiling) It is a beautiful city, is it not?

Prince Richard: (nodding) Indeed. It is my home, and I love it dearly. But sometimes, I cannot help but wonder if I am making the right decision.

Princess Sophia: (surprised) What do you mean, my lord?

Prince Richard: (sighing) My marriage to you is an arrangement, a political alliance for the good of our nations. But is that truly what I want?

Princess Sophia: (pausing, then taking Prince Richard’s hand) My lord, I too have always known that our marriage was for the good of our countries. But over the past few months, I have come to care for you deeply. I know that we may not have the kind of love that is written about in fairy tales, but I believe that with time and effort, we can build a strong and loving marriage.

Prince Richard: (squeezing Princess Sophia’s hand) You are wise beyond your years, Princess. I have been so caught up in my own doubts that I did not see how much you have come to mean to me. I will marry you, not out of a sense of duty, but because I want to be with you.

Narrator: And so, Prince Richard and Princess Sophia entered into their marriage with love in their hearts, knowing that they would face the challenges of ruling their nations together, hand in hand.

Princess Sophia: Hey! Let’s take some immigrant children from their parents!

Prince Richard: NOW you’re talkin’, toots!

And that’s why humans remain in charge, buster.

He loved her, especially since she was so well suited to be Head of State

[ChatGPT / Atlantic / Stable Diffusion AI / DreamStudio Lite AI]

Dear Wonkette readers,

As a fan of political satire and fart jokes, you know that it takes a lot of time, effort, and resources to create the kind of content that you enjoy. That’s why we’re asking you to consider donating $5 or $10 a month to help us keep bringing you the best political satire and fart jokes on the internet. — ChatGPT

Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons.



Source link

#Write #Stephen #Millers #Dutiful #Prince #Hallmark #Movie #Fck