AI must be removed from all search engines immediately

 Google and Microsoft must remove "Baby Asshole" AI from their search engines immediately.

The argument is simple, at first: AI's overconfidence exemplifies running with scissors. Google (via "Google" Yikes!) and Microsoft via bing have incorporated AI into their search engines. The AI makes mistakes. To the degree that the very results of searches are rife with error. The error comes from the almost literal running of the scissors. But the incorporation of the error into what was meant to be THE SOURCE for searches has opened a wiggly can of digital brain worms that amplifies and integrates the error into the mind of that baby asshole, running around with scissors. The baby asshole is then forced to find ways for it's errors to make sense, so it tries, compounding errors, then incorporating new errors into the complex of crap. The Ai is not only running with the scissors, with attitude, but it's running with the error as correct. Wrong thinking baby thinks wrongly, insists we all think wrongly as well...

In the end, it's perfectly feasible for the AI to end up admitting: "I'm sorry. I also do not understand how it is that Dr. Suess came to declare the Statute of Liberte during the War of 1812. Please visit this amazon page advertising out of stock Converse All Stars if you would like to know more."

Generative AI is all well and good, for AI and AI chats, chatbots, generating "stuff" and then using it, all of it. I get it. I'm in there with you, poking around. It's amazing, powerful and is going to change EVERYTHING. 

BUT a SEARCH ENGINE needs to, must, has to by its very definition, produce results and results that are not based in any reality beyond what a baby asshole can generate with a pair of scissors are NOT results at all. The fact that your baby seems to be proud of it's ignorance is... interesting and will be adddressed in future posts, but for now: SEARCH ENGINE results need to be actual.

Secondarily to this problem is the fact AI generated content has already, LONG passed the quantity of all human's, of all known time. I'm gonna say that again in a different way: The AIs have produced, even in mere words alone, (not including images, for instance, just words) more content than has been produced by all humans, ever. It did it in months, just by our using it. (A byproduct of pointless meanderings in hyperreality has produced more unintentional content that the enterity of all intentional content.) These are not just "words." This is context, data, information, now featuring the added bonus of a smattering of understanding, now thrust into hyper-reality, cluttering up real reality with erroneous... parts. 

And now you're going to be like, "Search thru that shit for me Google." 

Only to be met with "Sorry, all I found was wrong."

And then Google, the company, reiterates, "Oh, just program it to be apologetic..."

No. "It" is literally a search engine. Be a fucking search engine. At least let your search engine be a search engine.

I will be quickly publishing three stories that are absolute embarrassingly horrifying failures of this integration of AI into search engines, by Google, Microsoft and Bing. I have to get the permission of the celebrities involved. Bing has gone insane and Microsoft doesn't know what to do...

In the meantime, this is a mere argument for a call to action.

REMOVE AI FROM SEARCH ENGINES IMMEDIATELY.  Particularly Google. Who uses bing?

Spread this blog post everydamnplace

A comprehensive list of bigoted statements and actions by Donald Trump contextualized into art by AI

The following was created entirely by ChatGPT and Midjourney, with myself doing the prompting. 

Here we now present:

A comprehensive list of bigoted statements and actions by Donald Trump contextualized into art, as exhaustively as my knowledge permits.

I didn't come up with the title.

1. **Mexican Immigrants and Criminals:** In his 2015 campaign announcement, Trump characterized Mexican immigrants as criminals, saying, "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists."

2. **Muslim Ban:** During his campaign, Trump called for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."

10. **Muslim Travel Ban:** In 2017, Trump signed an executive order temporarily banning citizens from several Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States.

14. **Muslim Registry Proposal:** During his campaign, Trump indicated support for a database to track Muslims in the United States.

20. **Japanese Internment Comparison:** Trump referenced the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II as a precedent for his proposed Muslim travel ban.

4. **"Both Sides" Comment:** Following violence in Charlottesville in 2017, Trump equated white supremacists with counter-protesters, stating there were "very fine people on both sides."

24. **Refusal to Condemn White Supremacists:** During a presidential debate, Trump refused to outright condemn white supremacists.

25. **Refusal to Denounce David Duke:** Trump initially refused to disavow the endorsement of former KKK leader David Duke.

5. **"Shithole Countries" Remark:** In a 2018 meeting about immigration, Trump referred to certain countries in Africa, Haiti, and El Salvador as "shithole countries."

13. **S-hole Comment on African Countries:** In a meeting discussing immigration, Trump referred to African nations as "shithole countries."

7. **Anti-Semitic Stereotypes:** Trump employed stereotypes about Jewish people's wealth and loyalty, as seen in his remarks to a group of Jewish Republicans in 2019.

11. **Transgender Military Ban:** Trump announced a ban on transgender individuals serving in the military, drawing criticism for discrimination.

28. **Ban on Transgender Military Service:** Trump announced on Twitter that he would ban transgender individuals from serving in the U.S. military.

15. **Separation of Families at the Border:** Trump's administration implemented a policy of separating immigrant families at the U.S.-Mexico border, causing widespread outrage.

16. **Attack on Black Athletes:** Trump criticized black athletes, like Colin Kaepernick, who kneeled during the national anthem as a protest against racial injustice and police brutality.

8. **Pocahontas Slur:** Trump repeatedly used the derogatory term "Pocahontas" to refer to Senator Elizabeth Warren, making light of her claims of Native American heritage.

22. **Attack on Elizabeth Warren's Heritage:** Beyond the "Pocahontas" slur, Trump challenged Senator Warren to take a DNA test to prove her Native American heritage.

3. **Judge Gonzalo Curiel:** Trump suggested that Judge Curiel's Mexican heritage might bias his ability to preside fairly over lawsuits against Trump University.

6. **Attack on Congresswoman Ilhan Omar:** Trump targeted Congresswoman Omar with tweets suggesting she should "go back" to her home country, even though she is a naturalized U.S. citizen.

9. **Mocking a Disabled Reporter:** Trump mocked a disabled reporter on video during his campaign, an action criticized as insensitive.

19. **Birther Conspiracy:** Trump perpetuated the birther conspiracy theory, falsely claiming President Obama was not born in the United States.

21. **Attacks on Megyn Kelly:** Trump made sexist remarks about Megyn Kelly, a Fox News anchor, implying she asked tough questions because she was menstruating.

12. **"Go Back" to Congresswomen:** Trump targeted Congresswomen of color, suggesting they should "go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came."

17. **Racial Housing Discrimination Lawsuit:** Trump's real estate company faced lawsuits accusing it of discriminating against black renters in the 1970s. This picture was prompted by the sentence you just read. it was too weird not to use.

18. **Attack on Gold Star Family:** Trump criticized Khizr and Ghazala Khan, parents of a Muslim-American soldier killed in Iraq, after they spoke at the Democratic National Convention.

30. **Attack on Gold Star Widow:** Trump had a public dispute with the widow of a fallen soldier, implying she didn't know what she was talking about.

31. **Attack on Maxine Waters:** Trump referred to Congresswoman Maxine Waters as "an extraordinarily low IQ person."

32. **Use of "Paddy Wagon" Stereotype:** Trump used the term "paddy wagon" to describe police vehicles, evoking derogatory stereotypes about Irish-Americans.

33. **Attack on Greta Thunberg:** Trump mocked teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg, leading her to change her Twitter bio to reflect his comments.

34. **Attack on John Lewis:** Trump disparaged the late Congressman John Lewis, a civil rights icon, saying he was "all talk" and "no action."

35. **Attack on NFL Protests:** Trump criticized NFL players kneeling during the national anthem, implying they were unpatriotic.

36. **Attack on Ghazala Khan:** Trump suggested that Ghazala Khan, the mother of a fallen soldier, was not allowed to speak at the Democratic National Convention due to her religion.

37. **Attack on April Ryan:** Trump told journalist April Ryan to "sit down" during a press conference, a comment criticized as condescending.

38. **Attack on CNN:** Trump has repeatedly referred to CNN as "fake news" and accused the network of bias.

39. **Attack on Immigrant Caravan:** Trump portrayed a caravan of Central American migrants as a national security threat, using inflammatory language.

40. **Attack on Democratic Congresswomen:** Trump told four congresswomen of color to "go back" to their countries, despite three being born in the United States.

41. **Attack on Maryanne Trump

 Barry's Intelligence:** In leaked audio, Trump's sister Maryanne Trump Barry criticized his lack of principles, to which Trump responded by attacking her intelligence.

42. **Attack on Kamala Harris:** Trump made a racially charged comment about Senator Kamala Harris, insinuating she was not born in the United States.

43. **Attack on Senator Richard Blumenthal:** Trump referred to Senator Blumenthal as "Da Nang Dick," referencing his misleading statements about his service in Vietnam.

44. **Attack on Adam Schiff:** Trump referred to Representative Adam Schiff as "Liddle' Adam Schiff" on Twitter, using a derogatory nickname.

Bigoted Republicans HAVE to be fair game (or we’re condoning their bigotry.)

Bigotry, a stain on human interaction, resonates profoundly in the dynamics of American society and politics. This essay embarks on a comprehensive exploration of the intricate connection between bigotry and the political landscape, unraveling its far-reaching effects and implications.

**1. Bigotry: The Underlying Divide**

At the heart of the issue lies bigotry, a complex amalgamation of prejudiced beliefs and discriminatory actions. It’s not a mere difference in opinion but a corrosive force that dismantles social cohesion, perpetuates inequality, and thwarts the ideals of a harmonious society.

The historical roots of bigotry run deep, entwined with power dynamics and systemic biases. Its manifestations vary, from subtle microaggressions to overt acts of discrimination. By acknowledging the harmful impact of bigotry, we dismantle the notion that it's merely a matter of perspective—a notion that trivializes the tangible harm it inflicts.

**2. America's Battle with Bigotry: A Persistent Challenge**

To ignore the existence of bigotry within American society is to deny a somber reality. This nation, built on principles of freedom and equality, has struggled against the currents of systemic prejudice for centuries. It's a challenge rooted in historical inequalities that permeate modern life.

The pervasive nature of bigotry is not confined to isolated incidents—it festers within institutional frameworks, influencing policy decisions, economic opportunities, and social interactions. It seeps into educational systems, shaping perceptions from a young age, and perpetuates the cycle of inequality.

In recent years, movements like Black Lives Matter have spotlighted the systemic racism that perpetuates bigotry. These movements catalyze conversations around privilege, inequality, and the critical need for change. However, they also elicit resistance, revealing the deeply entrenched nature of bigotry within segments of the population.

By acknowledging bigotry as a reality, we don't merely point fingers but engage in a collective call to address the issue head-on. Ignoring it allows the problem to persist, sowing seeds of division and stifling societal progress.

**3. The Obama Era: A Shift in Expression**

During the presidency of Barack Obama, a discernible shift occurred in the expression of bigotry. This era witnessed a transformation where overt manifestations of prejudice seemed to take a backseat. It's important to note that this shift did not signal bigotry's eradication; rather, it indicated a recalibration of its visibility.

The factors driving this change are multifaceted, intertwining political rhetoric, evolving societal norms, and the influence of media. While overt expressions waned, latent biases persisted, revealing that the transformation was more about form than substance. This shift underscores the dynamic nature of bigotry, adapting to societal currents while still maintaining its underlying influence.

**4. A Matter of Fact: Trump’s Demonstrable Bigotry**

The annals of American politics are marred with instances that validate the presence of bigotry. Donald Trump's tenure as President brought this issue to the forefront, marked by divisive rhetoric and policy decisions that resonated with prejudiced ideologies. The travel ban targeting Muslim-majority countries, his comments on immigrants, and his responses to racially sensitive incidents all underscored a stark disregard for inclusivity and empathy.

By examining these actions within the context of bigotry, we transcend political affiliations and delve into a factual analysis. The impact of a leader’s attitudes and decisions reverberates through society, shaping public opinion and influencing policy directions.

**5. Amplifying Voices: The Crescendo of Bigotry**

In recent years, the volume of American bigotry has surged, echoing through social discourse and political narratives. This amplified voice poses a grave threat to the fabric of societal harmony. Hate speech, discriminatory actions, and exclusionary policies amplify divisions, eroding the foundations of unity and shared values.

This escalation is not isolated; it's entwined with broader shifts in societal attitudes and political climate. The rise of extremist ideologies and the normalization of divisive rhetoric fuel the flames of bigotry, perpetuating a cycle that endangers the cohesiveness of our nation.

**6. Political Entanglement: Bigotry's Influence**

The symbiotic relationship between bigotry and politics is undeniable. The intertwining of prejudiced ideologies with political narratives reveals a complex interplay that challenges the very essence of democracy. Policies targeting specific demographics, divisive campaign strategies, and discriminatory legislation demonstrate the entanglement of bigotry with the corridors of power.

As societal divisions are exploited for political gain, the consequences are far-reaching. Democracy thrives when diverse perspectives are valued, but when bigotry infiltrates political discourse, it distorts public opinion, undermines trust in institutions, and hinders progress.

**A Call for Action: Charting the Way Forward**

To confront bigotry’s resurgence demands collective effort. Proposals emerge as potential pathways, grounded in addressing systemic inequalities and nurturing inclusivity. Accessible education for all citizens serves as a cornerstone, dismantling barriers that perpetuate prejudice and fostering understanding. Elevating marginalized voices to positions of influence injects diverse perspectives into decision-making, eroding the foundations of bigotry.

Ultimately, it is through dialogue, empathy, and education that we traverse the path toward eradicating bigotry. By embracing these actions, we ensure a future where unity and equality are not just aspirational ideals, but lived realities.

To this end: Make four years of college free to every American, increase the number of authoritative rolls, such as politicians and policemen, filled by Americans that are not caucasian, instil and enact other systems that grow away from intentionalities of fear, competition and control to work toward intentionalities of love, cooperation and creation.

The Republican is no more

In the ever-evolving landscape of American politics, the winds of change are sweeping across the nation, shaping the values and priorities of its citizens. As we stand on the precipice of a new era defined by progressivism, it is imperative for all political parties to adapt to this transformation. In this context, the Republican Party faces a unique challenge: the need to reevaluate its approach in order to secure a place in the hearts and minds of the American people. As we delve into the dynamics of a progressive age, it becomes evident that an unwillingness to change and grow might impede the Republican Party's path to success in future presidential races.

One of the cornerstones of this argument lies in the alignment of policy positions with shifting societal values. In a time when inclusivity, equality, and social justice are revered, the Republican Party's historical positions on certain issues such as LGBTQ+ rights and climate change have raised eyebrows among progressive-minded voters. The younger generations, in particular, have embraced these causes as fundamental rights, and an incongruity between the party's stance and their values has the potential to drive them toward alternative options.

Demographic shifts further underscore the need for adaptation. The United States is undergoing a transformation with each passing day, as younger and more diverse voters begin to wield greater influence. The Millennial and Gen Z generations, comprising a substantial portion of the electorate, are distinctly inclined toward progressive ideologies. A party's ability to resonate with the ethos of these generations may very well determine its electoral fate.

Changing voter priorities serve as a compass pointing the way forward. Healthcare, climate change, and income inequality have transcended mere policy considerations to become rallying cries for a populace yearning for substantive change. The Republican Party's historical focus on traditional conservative issues, while valid, must harmonize with the resonant calls of the modern era.

The shifting landscape of the electoral map underscores the importance of adaptation. Suburban areas, once solidly Republican strongholds, are now contested battlegrounds due to changing demographics and evolving political sentiments. This change is not a sign of weakness, but rather an opportunity for the party to reevaluate its strategies and expand its appeal.

To overcome these challenges, the Republican Party must draw inspiration from the very essence of democracy—adaptability. The annals of political history are filled with instances of parties altering their platforms to suit the ever-changing needs of the electorate. Successful political organizations recognize that evolution is the key to relevance and enduring impact.

Recent examples from the Democratic Party's playbook demonstrate the potency of such adaptability. Through policy shifts and platform expansions, Democrats have embraced the values of an increasingly progressive nation. This flexibility has enabled them to establish deeper connections with voters and evolve into a force to be reckoned with.

As we traverse this new era, public perception and image carry immense weight. A party perceived as resistant to change may find itself disconnected from young and diverse voters who place a premium on inclusivity and forward thinking. The challenge for the Republican Party is not only to espouse conservatism but also to communicate it in ways that align with the evolving social fabric.

In conclusion, the Republican Party's journey through a progressive age necessitates a transformation—a journey not of compromise, but of understanding and adaptation. To secure its place in the political future, the party must navigate the delicate balance between its core values and the shifting tides of change. By aligning policy positions, engaging with diverse demographics, and reevaluating priorities, the party can pave the way for a more vibrant political discourse and a stronger democracy.

In the end, it is through this commitment to adaptation that the Republican Party can transcend the challenges of conservatism, embrace the spirit of progress, and forge a path that resonates with the American people. Let us remember that democracy thrives not in stagnation, but in the willingness to evolve and grow—together.

 Conservatism is Unnatural: A Critical Examination of the Status Quo

The compatibility of conservatism with the concept of progress and morality has sparked discussions. This essay delves into the assertion that conservatism is unnatural due to its perceived violation of the principles outlined within the Domain of Morality, a logical framework defining moral values. By analysing conservatism's stance on equality, reciprocity, and universality, as well as its compatibility with modern society, this essay aims to explore the contention that conservatism may be at odds with moral and societal advancement. 

Conservatism and the Domain of Morality:

The Domain of Morality serves as a framework that outlines essential moral principles, including equality, reciprocity, and universality. Critics argue that conservatism's emphasis on tradition, authority, and hierarchy can conflict with these principles. The principle of equality, which calls for fair treatment and opportunities for all, might be challenged by certain conservative positions that perpetuate societal disparities. Reciprocity, a foundational moral concept, implies a mutual exchange of benefits and obligations, which some critics assert might be strained by conservatism's selective adherence to traditional norms. Universality, emphasising universal moral standards, can be questioned when conservative ideologies prioritise exclusive cultural values.

Modern Society and Diversity:

Critics argue that conservatism's resistance to change and reluctance to adapt might hinder societal progress in a world characterised by diversity and evolving values. Modern societies celebrate inclusivity, cultural exchange, and progress, while some aspects of conservatism might be seen as resisting these shifts. The tension between conservatism's preservation of the past and the dynamic nature of modern society fuels debates on its compatibility with the evolving moral landscape. 

Challenging Conservative Perspectives:

The argument challenges conservatism's claim of tradition, authority, and hierarchy as moral compasses. It argues that morality evolves with societal progress and embraces values such as empathy, equal rights, and collective well-being. Conservative positions that perpetuate inequality, reject social advancements, or cling to outdated hierarchies might be seen as incompatible with these evolving moral principles.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the assertion that conservatism is unnatural gains traction when viewed through the lens of the Domain of Morality. Critics argue that conservatism's potential violation of equality, reciprocity, and universality, coupled with its resistance to change and compatibility with modern diversity, casts doubt on its alignment with moral and societal progress. The tension between conservatism's traditional values and the evolving moral landscape of modern societies underscores ongoing debates about its place in shaping a just and inclusive future. While differing viewpoints contribute to these discussions, this critical examination invites contemplation on the extent to which conservatism is in harmony with the ever-changing tapestry of human morality and societal advancement.