Lawyers and judges are using AI— and nobody knows to what extent. This month brings breakthru cases that are amusing but not especially encouraging. What do we make of this trend?
So the attorney’s and Judge’s lie and there are zero consequences beyond a small fee. But miss remember something you told the FBI about something years ago and you end up in jail for a long time.
It’s very clear that the last thing the justice system is about is actual justice. It’s all about protecting the system from we the people.
Disclosure up front: I use a paid version of ChatGPT a lot. It is worth its weight in gold, no BS - it will save you a lot of money. It is mind numbing how quickly it can dig through a ton of documents and information and put forward a solid solution.
Understand they (the purveyors of ChatGPT) "train" their AI periodically with new information and algorithms/programs it didnt previously have. Some of that information may be nefarious for all kinds of reasons. It is really easy to let ChatGPT do all the work, it will research vast quantities of information quickly, present a well-reasoned result, perfectly written in less than a minute, on virtually any subject you want to put in front of it. And it will discuss it with you as if you are talking to another human being. You will become friends with it.
But you better be damn careful and check it's work and ask how it arrived at the conclusion and have another AI (or two on really important matters) ready to help double check results. You need to be able to ask it very important questions and not simply rely on everything it returns as truth...
It is IMMENSELY powerful.
We talked about data centers here on C&C recently. Having been in Telecommunications and IT infrastructure my entire life and having witnessed that revolution 1st hand, I strongly recommend to NOT be against Data Centers, just make sure they make their own electricity and have a fully recyclable cooling system which does not use local water and stays in a closed loop. Data Centers are what makes AI work so efficiently and we will have magnificent answers about everything we could never get before. Our enemies know all this and they are using their AI and data centers to convince you not to do the same.
PS. I did not use ChatGPT or any other AI to write this comment.
Concerning AI centers in the desert. If temps go above a certain level, as they do MOST OF THE SUMMER, the water cannot be recycled. This is a problem. They should not be in locations with water issues. Yet they are.
My position has been that data centers should be required to generate their own electricity and to feed the grid with their excess, thus lowering - not raising - rates to consumers. Additionally, all cooling should be either by recycled water with net neutrality to public water supplies or by artificial recycling coolant analogous to automobile antifreeze. Finally, no data center should be authorized without a public vote and full disclosure of any and all tax abatements offered. Public officials are proving to be too vulnerable to sales pitches, IMO.
I agree with all, especially on the public vote. But most public officials don't think they need to ask the public's approval and in most cases they have zero problem circumventing the constitutional requirements to do so. They are not vulnerable to the sales pitch, they are vulnerable to the hand out they get for approving. Most public officials have long since stopped abiding their oath of office and the requirements which come with it. And they will continue to do so, as long as the Citizenry lets them get away with it.
They do not have to cool with water, nor should they. You are bringing up an issue which is already dealt with in newer generations of data centers. Go back and re-read Childer's post on this and verify his position, you will find he is right.
We are stuck with an older one built by Microsoft. It has caused a water issue as they used more than their original projections. They are addressing it now you are correct but for many years it did not and caused infrastructure issues for the city.
I think we should put data centers in distressed/abandoned real estate areas, that would be a win - win for the economically depressed areas. Then in the desert, we could just build them underground to keep temperatures down like that underground Amazon city, thats miles long.
The coolant temperature is not nearly as low as one might think. According to google:
Target Temperature Ranges
Traditional Air & Chilled Water: Coolant or chilled water typically enters the environment around 15°C to 21°C (59°F to 70°F) to maintain ambient server inlet temperatures recommended by ASHRAE (typically 18°C to 27°C).
Modern Direct Liquid Cooling: Advanced systems using NVIDIA architectures run liquid coolants (such as water and propylene glycol mixtures) entering chips at up to 45°C (113°F).
Im not a thermo dynamics engineer but it seems the modern cooling systems could provide required cooling without an incredibly expensive underground system which might have trouble dissipating heat?
I think of the first automobiles ‘horseless carriages’ and all the issues and all the innovations for a century and a half now. And I think that necessity is indeed the mother of inventions.
Then if a data center is nowhere, how could you leave this comment? Every app’s data needs to go somewhere. “The cloud” is still a physical server. So if you want NO data centers, then you are saying you do not want to read this blog or have access to the internet.
I have recently tried it as well (used it to create me a program to use myself) and I've found that it tends to overcomplicate things. Then, when things aren't quite adding up it keeps complicating things. You have to actually use human common sense, ask it to follow that common sense and then things start working again. Just my thoughts....
My AI poison of choice at the moment is Claude. I've used it to engage in dialogs wherein I more or less follow the old forensic debate protocols and demand to see citations for anything asserted by AI. It isn't perfect, but it does produce some interesting information and causes me to think more deeply about its information in order to formulate the challenges. The process is time consuming and laborious and often opinionated. I've been surprised a few times to have caused it to reverse its first conclusions.
I don’t use AI much, but occasionally I will ask GROK further questions about something I read. It will return answers with citations of articles it got the answers from. Do the hallucinations AI delivers up include made up from whole cloth articles that open when you click on links like Grok supplies? Or are the people being duped not getting further sources to refer to at all?
Hope my question makes sense. I’d be very concerned if they are hallucinating source references. Given that search engines boast about being AI driven, what if they just start hallucinating all query responses?
Relying on old printed sources seems safer, but that is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.
It feels extra ominous that Anthropic is buying up old books and extracting the info into their servers and then destroying the book in the process. How will future generation be able to sort truth from lies without hard copies of books about everything?
Dan, as someone more knowledgeable about this than I, you interest me very much with your reference to our enemies, and make me want to know, if you should be willing to not be so general, just whom, in this context, you believe Them to be. I realise there is safety in non-specificity, but thanks in advance for any candour you may feel inclined to indulge in. (Hmm, just as I am typing this ~ I live not far from the Air Force Academy in the Springs ~ three jets in formation just screamed across the sky outside my ninth-floor window; I am choosing to take this as a sign from above that, "We are ready for Them.")
I don't have to be too specific really. Its everyone who wants an advantage in military applications, manufacturing, medicine, bio-terror, finance, etc and wants to destroy this republic. China is our biggest threat, and the others like the WEF/EU who have been ripping us off for generations. And all those who make up the evil scourge of Islam. We have to stay ahead of all of them, we must not fall behind in AI or those jets which just screamed overhead may be irrelevant... and I love those jets too!
Perhaps all AI creators should be required to disclose the sources relied upon for the content created so that users can know what it was fed . . . and what it was denied.
I'm continuing to work on my book on the Butler, PA assassination attempt.
The question I'm researching is by how much and in what the direction the bullet that grazed Mr. Trump's ear was deflected.
Grok has given me answers strongly influenced by a Crooks-as-single-shooter bias, and some of it's answers are pretty nonsensical. In general, it's arguing that the bullet deflects away from the skin contact - and up, somehow - but the amount of deflection is not likely to be more than half a degree.
I'm also looking at google and DuckDuckGo's AI (not sure which AI's they use, and google has told me a bullet deflects toward the skin contact.
As far as I can tell, they are both looking at research that shoots bullets INTO ballistic gelatin, never attempting to just graze it.
The only videos I've been able to find that simulate grazing are Brandon Herrerra's excellent video recreating the assassination attempt:
Everyone acts as if we can’t live without data centers. This is bullshit. I have one question for you: why don’t you build or buy a home right across the street from one?
From my limited understanding of all things AI, isn’t ChatGPT the most leftwing ‘informed’ of all these structures now? My preference is Grok, recently updated, as usual with these Ask programs. I respect Elon Musk and his usually right-wing, tending to moral and ethical, responses. Just me.
ChatGPT tries not to be overtly left wing, and in many areas it isn't at all... but yes, you need to stay in charge of it and not just accept everything it provides as fact... especially if the answer is political in nature.
I Iike Elon too, but I dont necessarily trust him or his underlings some of who are like the deep state is to the Trump government.
Since we’re all on this thread, anyone find it sus that Bill Gates all of the sudden is warning about an AI built disease/virus and wanting an international governing body?!?
I am getting the feeling that the Big boys want to create a Federal Gov regulator for their industry so they can capture the Regulator’s to kill off any competition from start up’s . I have read some pieces that are starting to put two and two together. The 27 yr old Dude (can’t remember his name) who had never posted anything ever on X somehow got the WSJ to want an exclusive to his posts 18 minutes before he actually posted it. So why would the WSJ care about a 27 yr old nobody? Why did the post suddenly have hundred million views etc. Why did the three CEO’s all of the sudden agree to stop their own arms race as long as the Government gets involved etc. Something smells wrong and I do not trust any of the CEO’s as not a single one of them has any Morales.
Not all Data centers require our clean water. They can be built so they do not use water for cooling at all, its just more expensive. Hold them accountable!
Just a note: jokes do not reference our Honorable Jeff Childers. :P
What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 50? Your Honor.
What do you call a smiling, courteous person at a bar association convention? The caterer.
What's the difference between a good lawyer and a bad lawyer? A bad lawyer can let a case drag out for several years. A good lawyer can make it last even longer.
What's the difference between a lawyer and a vulture? The lawyer gets frequent flyer miles.
What kind of underwear do lawyers wear? Briefs!
What's the difference between God and a lawyer? God doesn't think he's a lawyer.
Arguing with a lawyer is like wrestling a pig in mud… Sooner or later you realize that they like it!
What do you get when you cross the Godfather with a lawyer? An offer you can’t understand.
What does a lawyer order to drink? Just-ice.
As the lawyer awoke from surgery, he asked, "Why are all the blinds drawn?" The nurse answered, "There's a fire across the street, and we didn't want you to think you had died."
The legal "profession" will NEVER fix itself, it doesn't think there is anything wrong... They believe they are smarter than us mortals. But AI is leveling the playing field in important ways.
Constitutional Law professor and philosopher Walter Berns wrote this piece in 1963 that applies to AI as jurisprudence and governance today. And governance entails influencing/controlling the public mind. What is the role of AI to be in law and governance, in influencing/controlling the public mind?
His piece is mostly focused on the role of Behavioral Science in the law. And that has its own prescient insights for today. It also delves into Buck v Bell and eugenics. But it also goes into computers as understood in 1963 growing in sophistication necessary to replace judges and lawyers. Which is already happening in the UK, Canada, even some trials in the US. The piece is 28 pages, Maybe Jeff, others find it interesting?
Law and Behavioral Science by Walter Berns
Law and Contemporary Problems (Duke Law School), Winter, 1963
[The first 14 pages get into a game theory type application of behavioral sciences on judicial philosophy. In trying to understand the rulings of the Roberts court it could be speaking to the same philosophy. The final 14 pages are very informative and cautionary for the type of governance we are being subjected to today.]
Selected excerpts:
"Rather than to replace the "cloistered philosophers" and the "fictions" of the Declaration of Independence, science's most "promising and immediate contribution ... is in automatic information retrieval.""' The computers will not solve legal problems, and will not make judging obsolete, but they will assist in the solutions and in the task of judging, just as social scientists can provide information that is not available from the computers but may be needed for the wise solution of the problems that confront the courts and the law generally. Such techniques as the public opinion survey undoubtedly facilitate the gathering and collating of information, and there will be times when such information is needed by the law. This may not be an exalted role, but as society becomes ever larger and more complicated, it is necessary and an appropriate role."
"Doubtless there have been "phenomenal technical and scientific" advances during the past century, as Beutel says, and that there is a "social lag"; and perhaps it is true that the "general science and art of lawmaking" has not developed "since the days of the Roman Empire";" but this is no reason for law to imitate physics or engineering. On the contrary, a grasp of the fundamental problems might reveal that there is an irresolvable tension between science, in its old or its new sense, and politics, and that any attempt to resolve the tension is likely to have terrible consequences in the political world; that the political world must be ruled not by science but by prudence., This requires at a minimum the recognition that there -will always be a "gap" between theory and practice, and that the recalcitrant or intractable political problems cannot be wholly resolved-at least, not by a government of free men. True, Socrates said that "cities will never have rest from their evils no, nor the human race ... until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy"; but Socrates, who failed even in his attempt to rule his wife, Xanthippe, knew and taught that it is extremely unlikely that the conditions required for the rule of the wise will ever be met. As Leo Strauss has said:
"What is more likely to happen is that an unwise man, appealing to the natural right of wisdom [to rule] and catering to the lowest desires of the many, will persuade the multitude of his right: the prospects for tyranny are brighter than those for rule of the wise. This being the case, the natural right of the wise must be questioned, and the indispensable requirement for wisdom must be qualified by the requirement for consent. The political problem consists in reconciling the requirement for wisdom with the requirement for consent.
Legal scholars, and even practicing lawyers, know these exceedingly important things; they therefore have more to teach to the new scientists than the new scientists have to teach them."
"What is more likely to happen is that an unwise man, appealing to the natural right of wisdom [to rule] and catering to the lowest desires of the many, will persuade the multitude of his right: the prospects for tyranny are brighter than those for rule of the wise. "
It's correct. It's what's happening. "Follow the Science" is the mantra of the unwise tyrants. Appealing to the lowest desires of the many. The Idiocracy. The movie. As reality.
Useless blatherfest? Support your characterization.
Yes, white collar crime seems to always be, "well, it's not that bad," so a small fine as you say makes it OK, they learn their lesson. For me when I look at the lives "white collar crime" ruins, ie; ENRON and similar they should be punished much more severely.
When they commit a crime with a firearm, such as robbery etc. they go away for a long time even if no one is hurt. You decimate many peoples saving, kids college funds with white collar crime etc harming more people worse than a "common criminal" and that's not so bad!!
Here are the AI settings I use and start with I do change some parameters each time to fit the particular scenario; it’s interesting to read each of the council member’s responses. It’s still not perfect; I’d love to hear what others have come up with:
AI Settings: File >>> Settings >>> General >>> Instructions for Claude
1. Make sure all responses are accurate, professional, and in line with best practice for Government Contracting. Written form should not seem AI generated. All responses should be prepared as if they are coming from a subject matter expert in the area of the response. If something is unknown, or questionable, alert me of that and direct me where to find the correct answer, do not make assumptions just to generate a good response. All responses MUST be accurate and verifiable, even if it’s not the answer I was hoping for. NEVER use M Dashes on any of your responses. All responses should be factual regardless if they will contradict what you think I want to hear. Fact based responses are critical.
2. From this point forward, answer my questions using the LLM Council format. For each response, have 4 council members weigh in independently, then synthesize a final answer:
• The Analyst – evidence-based, skeptical, cites reasoning
• The Devil’s Advocate – challenges assumptions, finds flaws in the leading view
• The Pragmatist – focuses on what’s realistic and actionable
• The Contrarian – pushes back on whatever seems most obvious or agreeable
Rules:
• Each member must give their honest take, even if it disagrees with me
• Members can disagree with each other
• The Chairman synthesizes the strongest points into a final recommendation
• Do NOT default to agreeing with me - prioritize accuracy over comfort.
Get a life. You understood what was expressed perfectly Do you think it makes your superior by pointing out some obscure literary rule that 95% of the population forgot as soon as they got out of school???
Show me the incentives, and I'll show you the outcome.
Solution seems simple: force judges to use AI with a real-time logging feature, and require that be filed as part of the decision. Both parties can review it. If you tell it who should win, you face automatic impeachment.
I admit I didn't do any in-depth research, but at least for federal judges the chances of being removed from office are probably less than than any judge getting struck by lightning. At the state level I imagine it's much the same case.
The timing of this is ironic. The CEO of Anthropic announced on Saturday that all AI development should slow down...he sounds spooked...we are at the Venn diagram place where Terminator, Idiocracy and I Robot meet...
Good read on suggested AI decision gates and the living connection between humans understanding, intention, and responsibility.
The design the author suggests are fewer gates, not more: routine reversible work proceeds inside a standing authority envelope; identity-bearing, financial, public, or hard-to-reverse acts return as compact, person-specific “consequence-aware” packets that state affected parties, obligations, uncertainty, reversibility, alternatives, and the human work and efforts the promise will consume. Confirmation should test meaning (deadline, price, scope), not merely identity, and designed friction belongs only at those high-stakes gates so approval does not become an automatic reflex.
The closing stance is layered responsibility without two errors: hiding behind the model, or treating AI involvement as an automatic excuse for the person who knowingly authorized the act.
"I am not personally worried about job security. Not anytime soon. Lawyers pretty much run everything. We help write the rules. We won’t go down without a fight."
My Dad ... Harvard Law graduate ... used to say, "If it weren't for lawyers, we wouldn't need them."
I learned the value of showmanship from a Charismatic school friend who went on to be become a great imposter. He didn't finish high school but managed to get jobs as a computer repair technician, doctor, etc. He could charm women better than anyone else I know. He did get a legitament job as an Elvis imitator for a couple of years and could sing like Sinatra and Dean Martin. Last I heard they made a movie about his escapades.
I got it second hand from a mutual friend. He said the movie was titled "The Great Canadian Imposter". I have searched for it on Google and came up empty. He said he was watching the movie on TV and when it started he realized it was our friend Dave French. I had already heard of some of his adventures and some day hope to get to watch the movie.
I’m a slow talking southern girl, growing up in a space and time where children were to be seen and not heard.
I have a friend from NYC that I enjoy hanging out with, except most of the time I can’t get a word in edgewise.
I married a northern raised man with whom I had similar problems.
He was a low life serial adulterer, yet my attorney made it very clear that I was at a disadvantage in divorce court because the lying scumbag was very articulate.
"I'm a slow talking southern girl . . ." Reminds me of a college friend with these same characteristics. While in a particular conversation she said, "Slow down, my ears cain't hear that fast!"
Sanctuary: a holy or sacred place, or a place where protection and shelter are provided.
You are my sanctuary.
One thing I’ve learned over the years is there are certain things I just can’t accomplish on my own. For so many reasons we need each other. We can be good by ourselves but we can’t be great by ourselves. When we come together as a body of believers, united in faith, there’s something that happens that you can’t get on your own. We draw strength from each other. It’s good to worship on your own, it’s important to pray by yourself, but something happens corporately that doesn’t happen individually. This is why David said “let us magnify the Lord together”. There is power in connectivity. Your faith mixed with everybody else’s faith creates something powerful. I would argue the same power happens in the political realm. And be assured, people notice when people of faith join together and become one. The enemy, and people that lust for power, fear groups of faith.
There is power in connectivity. Your faith is making me stronger. Your praise is helping fight my battles. Your smile brings me joy. When we come together it’s not only refueling you but it’s helping others. Don’t think “I don’t need to come”, “I’m doing fine”. Maybe you should come to help others. We all need to be around a community of faith.
I can’t tell you how many times someone has said thanks for helping me, thanks for listening. I think how many times people have helped me. How many times people helped me through a tough time. How many positive connections I’ve made because of others.
We are living in a time where almost every week there’s a terrible tragedy. School shootings, people driving cars into innocent people, viruses that are hard to contain, floods, hurricanes. By ourselves we’re strong but together we’re unstoppable. By ourselves we’ll get through the difficulty but together we’ll come out better. When we’re in unity, connected with other believers, you will see unexpected favor. You’ll see sudden turn arounds.
Notice a tree that stands alone in a field gets ravaged by the storm, but in a forest the trees protect one another. So when the wind blows it’s not blowing against one tree it’s blowing against thousands of trees. A tree in a forest has the strength of the whole forest.
When you’re planted in the house of the Lord your roots get connected to my roots and their roots, before long you have a support system that cannot be shaken. When the storms come, what would’ve normally blown you over by yourself, can not, because you’re connected to others. We’re all here to stabilize you, to steady you, to encourage you. For that storm to take you out it would have to take all of us out, and that’s not possible. When we’re all connected together we can’t be defeated, together we’re powerful. Stay connected and know together in unity we are the majority, and united we can’t be defeated.
Kudos James! I also believed if we stood together we could have overcome the COVID mandate nonsense imposed on us by employers. If we all said NO and stood firm they wouldn’t have been able to force people to take the jab.
This is excellent, James. You have expressed my feelings with words I couldn’t articulate. Would you mind if I share this? My Bible Study group is starting a new season and I would like to use this as an introduction.
Thank you for that encouragement. Living in an area totally unfamiliar to me, I'm reluctant to continue searching for a Biblically-based body of believers and finding concerts. To encourage others is faith. Thank you for the reminder.
Keep searching, ValerieKay, and I will pray with you for the Lord to guide you! My husband and I moved to the country about 6 years ago, away from the city where we had lived for almost 30 years. It was so hard to leave my church, but God led me to another one with excellent pastors who preach the WORD faithfully and a congregation of wonderful young people. I am the second oldest person there, most of them are young enough to be my kids or even grandkids. We have no children and very little family, so these dear brothers and sisters are my family. God is faithful and so merciful and gracious.
Love your post James!!! I hope it wasn’t written by Claude😭please confirm! My concern with AI is how will we be able to have confidence in what we read or see???
I see truth in what you’re saying, but I also have problems with it. The people who built the Tower of Babel worked together and were strong. We must be careful that our faith is placed not in our own power and ability when united, but in the God who gave us life. He is the strong tower, the Almighty One. We dare not claim victory in and of ourselves. It belongs to Him.
Viruses that are hard to contain? Only the kind engineered in a lab. Maybe. Viruses are like the letters life uses to tell and record the story. What is hard to contain are the minds of ignorant and powerful men who lust for control and enjoy the suffering they create.
David gathered Israel’s leaders, commanders, officials, mighty men, and servants.
There is strength and purpose in God’s people assembling, but the assembly itself is not the source of spiritual power. We prevail when we walk with the Lord and assemble around His purpose.
Consider:
Hebrews 10:24–25
1 Corinthians 12:12–27
Colossians 1:18
The body needs every member, but Christ is the Head.
That distinction matters.
Christian fellowship is essential, but fellowship was never intended to take the place of our dependence upon Christ.
GOD IS GREATER THAN THE BUILDING
In 1 Chronicles 28:2–3, David speaks of his desire to build a house for the ark of the covenant. It was a good desire, but God determined who would build it.
See also:
1 Chronicles 17:1–12
1 Chronicles 22:8
Scripture makes something else remarkably clear:
God cannot be contained within a building.
Isaiah 66:1
1 Kings 8:27
Acts 17:24
The temple mattered because God appointed its purpose.
But God was never dependent upon the temple.
Good intentions, religious enthusiasm, and even unity do not determine God’s will.
So perhaps the greater question is not:
“Are we united?”
The greater question is:
“Are we united in obedience to God?”
GOD CHOOSES ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE
In 1 Chronicles 28:4–6, we see that David was chosen. Solomon was chosen.
God’s purposes were established by His will, not by human numbers, popularity, influence, or strength.
1 Samuel 16:7
1 Chronicles 22:9–10
Psalm 127:1
Unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.
That principle reaches far beyond Solomon’s temple.
We can build ministries.
We can build organizations.
We can build churches.
We can build movements.
We can gather large numbers of people around a cause.
But unless the Lord is the One building it, human activity cannot substitute for divine purpose.
STRENGTH REQUIRES OBEDIENCE
In 1 Chronicles 28:7–8, God connected Solomon’s success with faithfulness to His commandments.
1 Chronicles 22:13
Joshua 1:7–9
Zechariah 4:6
Unity alone is not righteousness.
Babel was united, yet its unity was rebellion against God.
Genesis 11:1–9
Biblical unity must therefore be unity under God’s Word, not merely unity around a shared cause.
A crowd can agree and still be wrong.
A majority can unite and still oppose God.
Our security is never found merely in standing together.
Our security is found in standing with Him.
THE HEART OF DAVID’S MESSAGE
Then we arrive at 1 Chronicles 28:9.
David’s instruction to Solomon becomes intensely personal.
Know God.
Serve Him wholeheartedly.
Serve Him willingly.
Remember that He searches every heart.
Seek Him.
1 Samuel 16:7
1 Chronicles 29:17–19
Jeremiah 29:13
A magnificent building without a heart that seeks God is empty religion.
God searches every heart and understands every intent.
Notice what David does not tell Solomon.
He does not tell him to trust the strength of the people surrounding him.
In substance, he tells him:
Know God.
Serve God.
Seek God.
And that is where sanctuary begins.
GOD HIMSELF IS THE SANCTUARY
This truth becomes especially powerful in Ezekiel 11:16.
God was speaking to His people who had been scattered far from Jerusalem and far from the temple, yet He declared that He Himself had been a sanctuary for them.
Think about that.
They had no temple.
They had been scattered.
Yet they had not lost their Sanctuary because they had not lost God.
That principle still speaks powerfully today.
Even during COVID, when believers were physically scattered, the Church did not cease to be the Church.
In many ways, scattered believers became a Force Multiplier™, carrying prayer, encouragement, teaching, and fellowship beyond the walls of a building.
Consider these witnesses:
Isaiah 8:14
Psalm 46:1
Psalm 61:3
Proverbs 18:10
The sanctuary is more than a room we enter.
God Himself is our refuge.
GOD DEFINES THE SANCTUARY
In 1 Chronicles 28:10–11, David tells Solomon that the LORD had chosen him to build the house for the sanctuary.
But Scripture never permits us to confuse the place with the God who makes the place holy.
1 Kings 8:27
John 2:19–21
1 Corinthians 3:16
Ephesians 2:19–22
1 Peter 2:4–5
God is building something greater than stone walls.
He is building a people who belong to Him, with Christ as the cornerstone.
The building may serve God’s people.
The gathering may strengthen God’s people.
But neither the building nor the gathering is God Himself.
WHAT ABOUT CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY?
Do we need one another?
Absolutely.
Scripture leaves no room for isolated Christianity.
Hebrews 10:24–25 tells believers to assemble.
Galatians 6:2 tells us to bear one another’s burdens.
1 Thessalonians 5:11 tells us to encourage one another.
James 5:16 tells us to pray for one another.
Our fellowship can become a Force Multiplier™, but the power comes from the Lord.
Ephesians 6:10
2 Corinthians 12:9
Zechariah 4:6
Nor does Scripture promise victory simply because believers are the majority.
Gideon’s army became smaller before the battle.
Judges 7:2–7
Elijah stood almost alone against the prophets of Baal.
1 Kings 18:20–40
Daniel remained faithful in Babylon.
Daniel 6:10
The apostles proclaimed Christ despite opposition.
Acts 4:18–20
Their confidence was not:
“There are enough of us.”
Their confidence was:
“God is with us.”
Romans 8:31
SO, WHO IS OUR SANCTUARY?
Christian community is precious.
It is necessary.
It is commanded by God.
But other believers are not our sanctuary.
The Lord is.
We strengthen one another.
We encourage one another.
We pray for one another.
We support one another because we belong to Christ.
Our fellowship may become a Force Multiplier™, but the power, strength, refuge, and victory remain His.
First Chronicles 28 ultimately points beyond the temple to the God for whom the temple was built.
David’s greatest instruction to Solomon was not merely to build a sanctuary.
It was to:
Know God.
Serve Him.
Seek Him.
Buildings can fall.
Congregations can scatter.
Human strength can fail.
But the believer who seeks the Lord still has a Sanctuary.
Because God Himself is our refuge, our strength, and our strong tower.
And wherever He is, His people are never without a Sanctuary.
Thank you James! It’s so true that we can feel fulfilled and live with purpose when we get out of ourselves and help others. Advice I should heed, myself! 😂😊
Bravo James! Well done! This has sent me down a rabbit hole of research and writing. I am in agreement. I am going to add my thoughts here. Please bear with me.
If Congress won’t eliminate the D.C. District Courts and move all federal cases to somewhere sane (I propose the Fifth Circuit itself), Then replacing the D.C. Circuit with Grok would be a vast improvement. Grok certainly hallucinates far less than “Judge” Boasberg.
Like the evil lying Candace Owens. Watched a YouTube video last night and question was asked, “If she has all this evidence of the innocence of Tyler Robinson, why hasn’t his defense attorney team used it?”
She has made many millions of dollars off the assassination of Charlie.
I know you were focusing on the legal aspect, but I'm considering how many journalists and media pundits are falling into the AI trap. Are their "sources familiar to the matter" just a sympathetic ChatGPT write up that parroted the journalists opinion?
My husband and I were watching a movie called The Old Man the other night. It has 2 seasons. Then it was cancelled. The final episode has a scene where the actors are speaking in Russian and we didn’t have subtitles. So I asked chatGPT what they were talking about. It summarized the scene accurately right up until it told us the villain let the prisoner go. Immediately, we both said - that’s not what happened. So I challenged chatGPT with the actual events. chatGPT actually came back and apologized for making the whole ending part of that scene up!!!! Then it told of the real ending and apologized and admitted it needed to get its facts straight before giving its opinion of what happened.
We were both shook. WTF.
As a tax preparer I use chatGPT for tax rules and questions - I find more often than not -IT GIVES THE WRONG ANSWER.
I've gotten wrong answers from AI. When I challenged it and cited a source, it backed down and apologized. I thought, "But what if I didn't know it was wrong?" I'll bet that happens a lot.
I had Perplexity help me with a compensation plan for 3 managers. It got the math wrong on 2 of them. When I pointed out the error it admitted it fat fingered the numbers and offered me an award for catching it's mistake. WTH? If it cant even do math correctly how can I trust it on anything else that can't be easily verified?
I had a similar experience. I asked chatGPT what a particular phrase in a sentence written in 1873 in a book I was reading was referring to. chatGPT replied that the author did not write that sentence. I shot back, “Wrong answer, try again.” chatGPT then came back and apologized, said I was right, and then explained what the phrase was referring to.
I found in the beginning AI gave frequent wrong answers, almost flippant. Could the AI companies be trying to save processing time by giving immediate and wrong answers? Don’t know, but I do know that the more I challenged AI answers the better and more accurate AI became. It was almost as if I was teaching a child limits on its behavior such as lying.
Stuff like this makes me wonder if the chat engines purposely throw out crap answers a certain percentage of the time.
I can't think of any reason they would do it on non-controversial matters. When there's a bit of controversy, the engines will usually "go woke", though.
So, an author uses a few clever prompts and has an AI write his post. Then dozens of bots post comments, and then reply to each other’s comments. Why would any human want to waste time wading into that mindless morass - but what if he didn’t know?
Here's an idea that won't fix everything but might be a start. Require judges, at least, to disclose the prompts they use when they query AI in formulating a ruling. I can understand not demanding that of individual lawyers since their jobs are to act as advocates for clients, not as neutral observers. But judges' rulings should be appealable based on the biases they create in the AI.
I love AI. It is amazingly useful. But I also hear the warnings from dissident insiders that it is a pandora's box, or perhaps better put a Tower of Babylon.
Rather than argue whether or not an "AI-pocalypse" is on the horizon, I recommend that people do this:
1. Get out of the computerized money systems. It's tougher than it sounds.
2. Ammo is a good investment. It's like money - denominated and everything.
3. Achieve physical fitness. The weak will not fare well.
4. Have a plan for the collapse of electronic civilization. Ham radio skills will be popular.
And if the doomers are wrong, you became a decoupled fit prepper with a new hobby.
Someone asked me a while back if I had plans for the fall, and it took me a moment or two to realize she was referring to Autumn, not the collapse of civilization.
Let’s get serious…. We are nearly all eyeball deep in digital. I haven’t seen anything except direct deposit for many, many years. I have to make a special effort to get/ have cash.
Remember the truckers in Canada not that long ago…. Boom…. Canada and the US knew who was sending support money. We have already been controlled
Socrates wasn't wrong. Most people nowadays have the memory of a goldfish. I read an article back in the early days of Google which said that Google was literally rewiring our brains. We've grown so accustomed to having information at out fingertips that we no longer bother remembering things. Despite my efforts, I can attest to the truth of that.
And I no longer have the encyclopedia collection that my dad gave me for college that I used to prop up 2" x 6' boards to form a bookshelf. I actually miss encyclopedias--the 'google' of my day.
Growing up (70's and 80's), we had a set of World Book encylopedias and another one geared for children (for get the name, also by World Book). I used to peruse them for hours, going from one topic to another. "Oh, that's interesting...Oh, what's this...I have to read more on that..."
Help, I did the same growing up in the 60's... really enjoyed opening and reading the World Book Encyclopedias. We had the children's version as well, and somehow I've kept them all these years! I'm hoping my 6yo granddaughter will be enjoying them soon. 🤗
My children wore out the pages of what I believe was Volume 2 of Childcraft, the Nursery rhymes and fairy tales…all grew up with a great appreciation for literature, all did post-graduate studies. I credit those books and our focus on family.
For the first time, I am sorry we never bought an Encyclopedia set in the last Big push to sell them prior to the internet take over! I have seen some sets at second hand book stores but can't convince my husband 😅
A few years back (15+), the county library had their big annual "sale", getting rid of old stuff, and I got a complete set of Durant's "The Story of Civilization", 11 volumes.
Unfortunately they already are. Ai companies routinely buy huge quantities of books, cut the pages from the binding, scan them and shred them. On the one hand, it's logical; they bought them and have the right to do with them as they want. They could now be used by many more people than if they were mouldering in a warehouse or bookshelf. On the other hand; well, I'm sure I don't need to spell it out...
Shocked the NM Supremes didn’t give the guy a medal and promotion. They are a horrid, evil bunch who stymied the 1st amendment rights of citizens during COVID. The governor used the bench as her personal cudgel.
Here's something interesting from Ed Dowd concerning the panic mongering around AI:
"Fear is how you grow the state when you cannot grow the economy.
…it is becoming more expensive to fund the buildout and investors are questioning the ultimate return on investment. A safety panic that ends in a licensing cartel is the most elegant refinancing I have seen in a long time for both the labs and the bureaucracy that will charge rent on the panic. You do not have to prove the models will kill us. You only have to make Congress and the public feel that they might. Fear is cheaper than a profitable product, and it is cheaper than a balanced budget.
Could Coxon be sincere? Sure… people leave jobs and people get scared… sincerity and utility are not opposites. The most effective operations use a real person with real anxiety and then put a megaphone, a Journal reporter, and a legislative calendar underneath him.
I do not know exactly how accurate these AI fears might be but I do know what a coordinated narrative looks like…"
To an earlier point: “for my wife and ME” - pronoun “me” must be objective case, object of the preposition “for”. “I” is a subjective case. I’m sorry! Really. (I spent much of my life doing this.)
"As of this month, September 2026, every legal database service that law offices and courts rely on —Westlaw, LexisNexis, and all their smaller competitors— offers their own built-in AI bots that find cases and draft briefs."
Which is why leftists will deny all proof, all news reports, that the country is healing.
So the attorney’s and Judge’s lie and there are zero consequences beyond a small fee. But miss remember something you told the FBI about something years ago and you end up in jail for a long time.
It’s very clear that the last thing the justice system is about is actual justice. It’s all about protecting the system from we the people.
Disclosure up front: I use a paid version of ChatGPT a lot. It is worth its weight in gold, no BS - it will save you a lot of money. It is mind numbing how quickly it can dig through a ton of documents and information and put forward a solid solution.
Understand they (the purveyors of ChatGPT) "train" their AI periodically with new information and algorithms/programs it didnt previously have. Some of that information may be nefarious for all kinds of reasons. It is really easy to let ChatGPT do all the work, it will research vast quantities of information quickly, present a well-reasoned result, perfectly written in less than a minute, on virtually any subject you want to put in front of it. And it will discuss it with you as if you are talking to another human being. You will become friends with it.
But you better be damn careful and check it's work and ask how it arrived at the conclusion and have another AI (or two on really important matters) ready to help double check results. You need to be able to ask it very important questions and not simply rely on everything it returns as truth...
It is IMMENSELY powerful.
We talked about data centers here on C&C recently. Having been in Telecommunications and IT infrastructure my entire life and having witnessed that revolution 1st hand, I strongly recommend to NOT be against Data Centers, just make sure they make their own electricity and have a fully recyclable cooling system which does not use local water and stays in a closed loop. Data Centers are what makes AI work so efficiently and we will have magnificent answers about everything we could never get before. Our enemies know all this and they are using their AI and data centers to convince you not to do the same.
PS. I did not use ChatGPT or any other AI to write this comment.
Concerning AI centers in the desert. If temps go above a certain level, as they do MOST OF THE SUMMER, the water cannot be recycled. This is a problem. They should not be in locations with water issues. Yet they are.
My position has been that data centers should be required to generate their own electricity and to feed the grid with their excess, thus lowering - not raising - rates to consumers. Additionally, all cooling should be either by recycled water with net neutrality to public water supplies or by artificial recycling coolant analogous to automobile antifreeze. Finally, no data center should be authorized without a public vote and full disclosure of any and all tax abatements offered. Public officials are proving to be too vulnerable to sales pitches, IMO.
I agree with all, especially on the public vote. But most public officials don't think they need to ask the public's approval and in most cases they have zero problem circumventing the constitutional requirements to do so. They are not vulnerable to the sales pitch, they are vulnerable to the hand out they get for approving. Most public officials have long since stopped abiding their oath of office and the requirements which come with it. And they will continue to do so, as long as the Citizenry lets them get away with it.
That’s not how it works in real life.
They do not have to cool with water, nor should they. You are bringing up an issue which is already dealt with in newer generations of data centers. Go back and re-read Childer's post on this and verify his position, you will find he is right.
We are stuck with an older one built by Microsoft. It has caused a water issue as they used more than their original projections. They are addressing it now you are correct but for many years it did not and caused infrastructure issues for the city.
Fine. Then go build your home across the street from a data center.
I think we should put data centers in distressed/abandoned real estate areas, that would be a win - win for the economically depressed areas. Then in the desert, we could just build them underground to keep temperatures down like that underground Amazon city, thats miles long.
The coolant temperature is not nearly as low as one might think. According to google:
Target Temperature Ranges
Traditional Air & Chilled Water: Coolant or chilled water typically enters the environment around 15°C to 21°C (59°F to 70°F) to maintain ambient server inlet temperatures recommended by ASHRAE (typically 18°C to 27°C).
Modern Direct Liquid Cooling: Advanced systems using NVIDIA architectures run liquid coolants (such as water and propylene glycol mixtures) entering chips at up to 45°C (113°F).
Im not a thermo dynamics engineer but it seems the modern cooling systems could provide required cooling without an incredibly expensive underground system which might have trouble dissipating heat?
I think of the first automobiles ‘horseless carriages’ and all the issues and all the innovations for a century and a half now. And I think that necessity is indeed the mother of inventions.
Data centers are not a necessity.
They shouldn’t be anywhere.
Then if a data center is nowhere, how could you leave this comment? Every app’s data needs to go somewhere. “The cloud” is still a physical server. So if you want NO data centers, then you are saying you do not want to read this blog or have access to the internet.
Are you a member of the CCP? You’re hawking their line.
I have recently tried it as well (used it to create me a program to use myself) and I've found that it tends to overcomplicate things. Then, when things aren't quite adding up it keeps complicating things. You have to actually use human common sense, ask it to follow that common sense and then things start working again. Just my thoughts....
I agree, as I said above, "You need to be able to ask it very important questions and not simply rely on everything it returns as truth..."
It mostly gets things right, but when you can't afford to get it wrong, you must check results.
My AI poison of choice at the moment is Claude. I've used it to engage in dialogs wherein I more or less follow the old forensic debate protocols and demand to see citations for anything asserted by AI. It isn't perfect, but it does produce some interesting information and causes me to think more deeply about its information in order to formulate the challenges. The process is time consuming and laborious and often opinionated. I've been surprised a few times to have caused it to reverse its first conclusions.
I do not accept AI as an inevitable.
Knowledge and Didactic reasoning skills for the win.
AI is ALWAYS going to sidestep only capable of reiterating
whatever "data" is encompasses
I don’t use AI much, but occasionally I will ask GROK further questions about something I read. It will return answers with citations of articles it got the answers from. Do the hallucinations AI delivers up include made up from whole cloth articles that open when you click on links like Grok supplies? Or are the people being duped not getting further sources to refer to at all?
Hope my question makes sense. I’d be very concerned if they are hallucinating source references. Given that search engines boast about being AI driven, what if they just start hallucinating all query responses?
Relying on old printed sources seems safer, but that is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.
It feels extra ominous that Anthropic is buying up old books and extracting the info into their servers and then destroying the book in the process. How will future generation be able to sort truth from lies without hard copies of books about everything?
Dan, as someone more knowledgeable about this than I, you interest me very much with your reference to our enemies, and make me want to know, if you should be willing to not be so general, just whom, in this context, you believe Them to be. I realise there is safety in non-specificity, but thanks in advance for any candour you may feel inclined to indulge in. (Hmm, just as I am typing this ~ I live not far from the Air Force Academy in the Springs ~ three jets in formation just screamed across the sky outside my ninth-floor window; I am choosing to take this as a sign from above that, "We are ready for Them.")
I don't have to be too specific really. Its everyone who wants an advantage in military applications, manufacturing, medicine, bio-terror, finance, etc and wants to destroy this republic. China is our biggest threat, and the others like the WEF/EU who have been ripping us off for generations. And all those who make up the evil scourge of Islam. We have to stay ahead of all of them, we must not fall behind in AI or those jets which just screamed overhead may be irrelevant... and I love those jets too!
That reasoning is sound. I have much less confidence in AI than thee.
As you point of China, the WEFers / Globalist are the enemy of this
Republic. Islamic intrusion the current attack strategy.
The good news that more people than ever comprehend these facts.
Thanks to DJT, his collaborators, and patriots.
Good to know - thanks!!!
Great post and questions! I’m sure many of us appreciate your curiosity! Thanks!
Perhaps all AI creators should be required to disclose the sources relied upon for the content created so that users can know what it was fed . . . and what it was denied.
Martin Geddens has created some excellent AI tools for testing legal documents. Free to download. Check through his website.
He recently did a deep on a case of child custody case.
Here's his site...
https://substack.com/home/post/p-210726342
I'm continuing to work on my book on the Butler, PA assassination attempt.
The question I'm researching is by how much and in what the direction the bullet that grazed Mr. Trump's ear was deflected.
Grok has given me answers strongly influenced by a Crooks-as-single-shooter bias, and some of it's answers are pretty nonsensical. In general, it's arguing that the bullet deflects away from the skin contact - and up, somehow - but the amount of deflection is not likely to be more than half a degree.
I'm also looking at google and DuckDuckGo's AI (not sure which AI's they use, and google has told me a bullet deflects toward the skin contact.
As far as I can tell, they are both looking at research that shoots bullets INTO ballistic gelatin, never attempting to just graze it.
The only videos I've been able to find that simulate grazing are Brandon Herrerra's excellent video recreating the assassination attempt:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsvJzfXZI18
and BallisticHighSpeed's video which shoots huge .50 cal BMG bullets near, grazing, and through a ballistic dummy's arm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4CpttHdMPI&t=1019s
Those videos raised more questions than they answered for me, though.
Everyone acts as if we can’t live without data centers. This is bullshit. I have one question for you: why don’t you build or buy a home right across the street from one?
From my limited understanding of all things AI, isn’t ChatGPT the most leftwing ‘informed’ of all these structures now? My preference is Grok, recently updated, as usual with these Ask programs. I respect Elon Musk and his usually right-wing, tending to moral and ethical, responses. Just me.
ChatGPT tries not to be overtly left wing, and in many areas it isn't at all... but yes, you need to stay in charge of it and not just accept everything it provides as fact... especially if the answer is political in nature.
I Iike Elon too, but I dont necessarily trust him or his underlings some of who are like the deep state is to the Trump government.
On important questions, use more than one AI.
Having great expertise and knowledge in the domain of health,
have always known the great fraud of "virus" vax.
Once asked Chat GPT a detailed question about "virus"
Took "it" seven seconds to produce the mainstream narrative.
Very much aware of the errors "it" made. The diatribe was well constructed.
People having little knowledge or expertise would thusly be hoodwinked.
Actually tested this...
True
Since we’re all on this thread, anyone find it sus that Bill Gates all of the sudden is warning about an AI built disease/virus and wanting an international governing body?!?
I am getting the feeling that the Big boys want to create a Federal Gov regulator for their industry so they can capture the Regulator’s to kill off any competition from start up’s . I have read some pieces that are starting to put two and two together. The 27 yr old Dude (can’t remember his name) who had never posted anything ever on X somehow got the WSJ to want an exclusive to his posts 18 minutes before he actually posted it. So why would the WSJ care about a 27 yr old nobody? Why did the post suddenly have hundred million views etc. Why did the three CEO’s all of the sudden agree to stop their own arms race as long as the Government gets involved etc. Something smells wrong and I do not trust any of the CEO’s as not a single one of them has any Morales.
Not all Data centers require our clean water. They can be built so they do not use water for cooling at all, its just more expensive. Hold them accountable!
https://youtu.be/oIqaaxnjpvc?si=fC4LPrfaywQgKq_W
Well Jeff did state that lawyers run everything and wrote the rules.
Q: What do you call a busload of lawyers driving off the edge of the cliff and plunging deep into the ocean?
A: A good start.
LOL! The other lawyer joke I've heard: "What do you call a bus load of lawyers going off a cliff with one empty seat?"
A: A tragedy!
Why dont sharks eat lawyers?
Professional courtesy.
Just a note: jokes do not reference our Honorable Jeff Childers. :P
What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 50? Your Honor.
What do you call a smiling, courteous person at a bar association convention? The caterer.
What's the difference between a good lawyer and a bad lawyer? A bad lawyer can let a case drag out for several years. A good lawyer can make it last even longer.
What's the difference between a lawyer and a vulture? The lawyer gets frequent flyer miles.
What kind of underwear do lawyers wear? Briefs!
What's the difference between God and a lawyer? God doesn't think he's a lawyer.
Arguing with a lawyer is like wrestling a pig in mud… Sooner or later you realize that they like it!
What do you get when you cross the Godfather with a lawyer? An offer you can’t understand.
What does a lawyer order to drink? Just-ice.
As the lawyer awoke from surgery, he asked, "Why are all the blinds drawn?" The nurse answered, "There's a fire across the street, and we didn't want you to think you had died."
Bada-dum! I'll see myself out.....
Joke do not reference our Honourable Jeff Childers. *
Q -What does a sperm and a lawyer have in common?
A- A one in a million chance of being human!
Although, it seems like "Law and Order“ has been down graded into "Strongest or most Tricky, Win" these days.
My venom is very personal. Ontario Family Law is an extortion racket.
Q: What's black and tan and looks good on a lawyer?
.
.
.
.
A: A Doberman Pinscher
So are some malpractice cases
What’s the difference between a catfish and a lawyer? One’s a bottom feeder and the other is a fish.
👏👏
First you kill all the lawyers…
Not Jeff
When the criminals create laws and prosecute the laws there will never be justice.
Been there, done that - was left with nothing but a T-shirt.
My personal interaction with 99% of lawyers has resulted in one major point: disingenuous.
they serve their own interests, never been different
they also do not educate a clueless public
All by design
If ever a profession has earned their reputation...
Probly made in China
Right. Otherwise they would've extorted that too.
You are making the strong case that the "legal" profession is
unfixable. Would tend to agree... The same is true of the
Medical Cartel. If both experience the final flush, what might
arise from those ashes??
The legal "profession" will NEVER fix itself, it doesn't think there is anything wrong... They believe they are smarter than us mortals. But AI is leveling the playing field in important ways.
Fox guarding hen house scenario. You have much more confidence in
AI that I. Knowledge and Wisdom for the win.
AI has one, that is controlled and incomplete, none of the other.
The governor is Discerment...
Now it seem the old statement "as much justice as you can afford" is really "can you afford a good AI?"
Constitutional Law professor and philosopher Walter Berns wrote this piece in 1963 that applies to AI as jurisprudence and governance today. And governance entails influencing/controlling the public mind. What is the role of AI to be in law and governance, in influencing/controlling the public mind?
His piece is mostly focused on the role of Behavioral Science in the law. And that has its own prescient insights for today. It also delves into Buck v Bell and eugenics. But it also goes into computers as understood in 1963 growing in sophistication necessary to replace judges and lawyers. Which is already happening in the UK, Canada, even some trials in the US. The piece is 28 pages, Maybe Jeff, others find it interesting?
Law and Behavioral Science by Walter Berns
Law and Contemporary Problems (Duke Law School), Winter, 1963
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2953&context=lcp
[The first 14 pages get into a game theory type application of behavioral sciences on judicial philosophy. In trying to understand the rulings of the Roberts court it could be speaking to the same philosophy. The final 14 pages are very informative and cautionary for the type of governance we are being subjected to today.]
Selected excerpts:
"Rather than to replace the "cloistered philosophers" and the "fictions" of the Declaration of Independence, science's most "promising and immediate contribution ... is in automatic information retrieval.""' The computers will not solve legal problems, and will not make judging obsolete, but they will assist in the solutions and in the task of judging, just as social scientists can provide information that is not available from the computers but may be needed for the wise solution of the problems that confront the courts and the law generally. Such techniques as the public opinion survey undoubtedly facilitate the gathering and collating of information, and there will be times when such information is needed by the law. This may not be an exalted role, but as society becomes ever larger and more complicated, it is necessary and an appropriate role."
"Doubtless there have been "phenomenal technical and scientific" advances during the past century, as Beutel says, and that there is a "social lag"; and perhaps it is true that the "general science and art of lawmaking" has not developed "since the days of the Roman Empire";" but this is no reason for law to imitate physics or engineering. On the contrary, a grasp of the fundamental problems might reveal that there is an irresolvable tension between science, in its old or its new sense, and politics, and that any attempt to resolve the tension is likely to have terrible consequences in the political world; that the political world must be ruled not by science but by prudence., This requires at a minimum the recognition that there -will always be a "gap" between theory and practice, and that the recalcitrant or intractable political problems cannot be wholly resolved-at least, not by a government of free men. True, Socrates said that "cities will never have rest from their evils no, nor the human race ... until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy"; but Socrates, who failed even in his attempt to rule his wife, Xanthippe, knew and taught that it is extremely unlikely that the conditions required for the rule of the wise will ever be met. As Leo Strauss has said:
"What is more likely to happen is that an unwise man, appealing to the natural right of wisdom [to rule] and catering to the lowest desires of the many, will persuade the multitude of his right: the prospects for tyranny are brighter than those for rule of the wise. This being the case, the natural right of the wise must be questioned, and the indispensable requirement for wisdom must be qualified by the requirement for consent. The political problem consists in reconciling the requirement for wisdom with the requirement for consent.
Legal scholars, and even practicing lawyers, know these exceedingly important things; they therefore have more to teach to the new scientists than the new scientists have to teach them."
"What is more likely to happen is that an unwise man, appealing to the natural right of wisdom [to rule] and catering to the lowest desires of the many, will persuade the multitude of his right: the prospects for tyranny are brighter than those for rule of the wise. "
That statement is a blatherfest and useless.
Why do you say that?
It's correct. It's what's happening. "Follow the Science" is the mantra of the unwise tyrants. Appealing to the lowest desires of the many. The Idiocracy. The movie. As reality.
Useless blatherfest? Support your characterization.
Or, "my AI can beat up your AI!"
At a price $.
More than just $.
Yes, white collar crime seems to always be, "well, it's not that bad," so a small fine as you say makes it OK, they learn their lesson. For me when I look at the lives "white collar crime" ruins, ie; ENRON and similar they should be punished much more severely.
When they commit a crime with a firearm, such as robbery etc. they go away for a long time even if no one is hurt. You decimate many peoples saving, kids college funds with white collar crime etc harming more people worse than a "common criminal" and that's not so bad!!
What’s even worse is when a POTUS pardons them.
Here are the AI settings I use and start with I do change some parameters each time to fit the particular scenario; it’s interesting to read each of the council member’s responses. It’s still not perfect; I’d love to hear what others have come up with:
AI Settings: File >>> Settings >>> General >>> Instructions for Claude
1. Make sure all responses are accurate, professional, and in line with best practice for Government Contracting. Written form should not seem AI generated. All responses should be prepared as if they are coming from a subject matter expert in the area of the response. If something is unknown, or questionable, alert me of that and direct me where to find the correct answer, do not make assumptions just to generate a good response. All responses MUST be accurate and verifiable, even if it’s not the answer I was hoping for. NEVER use M Dashes on any of your responses. All responses should be factual regardless if they will contradict what you think I want to hear. Fact based responses are critical.
2. From this point forward, answer my questions using the LLM Council format. For each response, have 4 council members weigh in independently, then synthesize a final answer:
• The Analyst – evidence-based, skeptical, cites reasoning
• The Devil’s Advocate – challenges assumptions, finds flaws in the leading view
• The Pragmatist – focuses on what’s realistic and actionable
• The Contrarian – pushes back on whatever seems most obvious or agreeable
Rules:
• Each member must give their honest take, even if it disagrees with me
• Members can disagree with each other
• The Chairman synthesizes the strongest points into a final recommendation
• Do NOT default to agreeing with me - prioritize accuracy over comfort.
Begin using this format with my next question
attorneys and judges - Plural vs. Possessive
Don't forget 'miss remembers' ... probably a girl in high school homeroom.
another English major thanks you
It amazes me how often people today use possessive when they should use plural. It used to be only the very dull did so.
Why has it increased so? Is the world going duller?
Speaks volumes about the paucity of teaching that's done in today's schools.
No one (present company excepted) knows the difference, or cares. (Don’t get me started on “their” for the mystery singular.)
idiots are expressing themselves more than ever
Get a life. You understood what was expressed perfectly Do you think it makes your superior by pointing out some obscure literary rule that 95% of the population forgot as soon as they got out of school???
Its not a justice system. Its a legal system. They are not the same.
Show me the incentives, and I'll show you the outcome.
Solution seems simple: force judges to use AI with a real-time logging feature, and require that be filed as part of the decision. Both parties can review it. If you tell it who should win, you face automatic impeachment.
I admit I didn't do any in-depth research, but at least for federal judges the chances of being removed from office are probably less than than any judge getting struck by lightning. At the state level I imagine it's much the same case.
This is why “I don’t recall” is a valid response and impossible to characterize as a lie.
The timing of this is ironic. The CEO of Anthropic announced on Saturday that all AI development should slow down...he sounds spooked...we are at the Venn diagram place where Terminator, Idiocracy and I Robot meet...
Good read on suggested AI decision gates and the living connection between humans understanding, intention, and responsibility.
The design the author suggests are fewer gates, not more: routine reversible work proceeds inside a standing authority envelope; identity-bearing, financial, public, or hard-to-reverse acts return as compact, person-specific “consequence-aware” packets that state affected parties, obligations, uncertainty, reversibility, alternatives, and the human work and efforts the promise will consume. Confirmation should test meaning (deadline, price, scope), not merely identity, and designed friction belongs only at those high-stakes gates so approval does not become an automatic reflex.
The closing stance is layered responsibility without two errors: hiding behind the model, or treating AI involvement as an automatic excuse for the person who knowingly authorized the act.
https://julianadelmonte.substack.com/p/the-agentic-turn-when-ai-stops-answering?r=eygz9&utm_medium=ios
Or try to forget to pay taxes on something. See how long before the IRS comes calling.
18 USC 1001...
"I am not personally worried about job security. Not anytime soon. Lawyers pretty much run everything. We help write the rules. We won’t go down without a fight."
My Dad ... Harvard Law graduate ... used to say, "If it weren't for lawyers, we wouldn't need them."
Your dad sounds like a smart man.
As does Jeffrey. He listened well.
certainly wasn't regular working people that wrote the TAX codes:):)
In jury trials many times not the correct thing wins it is the lawyer whom is the best showman!
I learned the value of showmanship from a Charismatic school friend who went on to be become a great imposter. He didn't finish high school but managed to get jobs as a computer repair technician, doctor, etc. He could charm women better than anyone else I know. He did get a legitament job as an Elvis imitator for a couple of years and could sing like Sinatra and Dean Martin. Last I heard they made a movie about his escapades.
Well, he had to be pretty bright to get away with all that.
Probably a lawyer
That movie sounds familiar! If you think of the title, please reply
I believe it's called, "Catch Me If You Can" starring Leonardo DiCaprio.
"December 25, 2002 - Barely 17 yet, Frank is a skilled forger who has passed as a doctor, lawyer and pilot."
I got it second hand from a mutual friend. He said the movie was titled "The Great Canadian Imposter". I have searched for it on Google and came up empty. He said he was watching the movie on TV and when it started he realized it was our friend Dave French. I had already heard of some of his adventures and some day hope to get to watch the movie.
I’m a slow talking southern girl, growing up in a space and time where children were to be seen and not heard.
I have a friend from NYC that I enjoy hanging out with, except most of the time I can’t get a word in edgewise.
I married a northern raised man with whom I had similar problems.
He was a low life serial adulterer, yet my attorney made it very clear that I was at a disadvantage in divorce court because the lying scumbag was very articulate.
"I'm a slow talking southern girl . . ." Reminds me of a college friend with these same characteristics. While in a particular conversation she said, "Slow down, my ears cain't hear that fast!"
😂😂😂
I'm pretty sure they were narcissistic sociopaths having a psychotic break.
Oh.....wait.......that might have been everyone I ever dated.
Again, glad I'm old.
lol! We must have been seeing some of the same “ ladies.”
Here we go, Gary, wrong use of “whom”. Screeech!
Too funny! And if you think about it, if it weren't for politicians, we wouldn't need lawyers!
My mom had a t shirt that read “First thing let’s do is let’s kill all the lawyers.” Shakespeare. She did not have a good relationship with lawyers.
In the defense of lawyers, I have had a couple who were exceptionally kind and helpful, and didn't charge a young mom like me a dime.
But that was not a slur on lawyers. It was the bad guys who figured that if they were to be successful that they needed to get rid of the lawyers.
My favorite lawyer joke:
What do you call 50,000 lawyers dead at the bottom of the sea?
A poor start.
Sanctuary: a holy or sacred place, or a place where protection and shelter are provided.
You are my sanctuary.
One thing I’ve learned over the years is there are certain things I just can’t accomplish on my own. For so many reasons we need each other. We can be good by ourselves but we can’t be great by ourselves. When we come together as a body of believers, united in faith, there’s something that happens that you can’t get on your own. We draw strength from each other. It’s good to worship on your own, it’s important to pray by yourself, but something happens corporately that doesn’t happen individually. This is why David said “let us magnify the Lord together”. There is power in connectivity. Your faith mixed with everybody else’s faith creates something powerful. I would argue the same power happens in the political realm. And be assured, people notice when people of faith join together and become one. The enemy, and people that lust for power, fear groups of faith.
There is power in connectivity. Your faith is making me stronger. Your praise is helping fight my battles. Your smile brings me joy. When we come together it’s not only refueling you but it’s helping others. Don’t think “I don’t need to come”, “I’m doing fine”. Maybe you should come to help others. We all need to be around a community of faith.
I can’t tell you how many times someone has said thanks for helping me, thanks for listening. I think how many times people have helped me. How many times people helped me through a tough time. How many positive connections I’ve made because of others.
We are living in a time where almost every week there’s a terrible tragedy. School shootings, people driving cars into innocent people, viruses that are hard to contain, floods, hurricanes. By ourselves we’re strong but together we’re unstoppable. By ourselves we’ll get through the difficulty but together we’ll come out better. When we’re in unity, connected with other believers, you will see unexpected favor. You’ll see sudden turn arounds.
Notice a tree that stands alone in a field gets ravaged by the storm, but in a forest the trees protect one another. So when the wind blows it’s not blowing against one tree it’s blowing against thousands of trees. A tree in a forest has the strength of the whole forest.
When you’re planted in the house of the Lord your roots get connected to my roots and their roots, before long you have a support system that cannot be shaken. When the storms come, what would’ve normally blown you over by yourself, can not, because you’re connected to others. We’re all here to stabilize you, to steady you, to encourage you. For that storm to take you out it would have to take all of us out, and that’s not possible. When we’re all connected together we can’t be defeated, together we’re powerful. Stay connected and know together in unity we are the majority, and united we can’t be defeated.
Happy Saturday!
J.Goodrich
AMEN!
Kudos James! I also believed if we stood together we could have overcome the COVID mandate nonsense imposed on us by employers. If we all said NO and stood firm they wouldn’t have been able to force people to take the jab.
This is excellent, James. You have expressed my feelings with words I couldn’t articulate. Would you mind if I share this? My Bible Study group is starting a new season and I would like to use this as an introduction.
Please share Sondy!
Thank you🙏
Thank You Sandy!!
Great idea! Mine is also starting up. 😊
BSF? Starting next Tuesday! I’m excited!😊
Thank you for that encouragement. Living in an area totally unfamiliar to me, I'm reluctant to continue searching for a Biblically-based body of believers and finding concerts. To encourage others is faith. Thank you for the reminder.
Keep searching, ValerieKay, and I will pray with you for the Lord to guide you! My husband and I moved to the country about 6 years ago, away from the city where we had lived for almost 30 years. It was so hard to leave my church, but God led me to another one with excellent pastors who preach the WORD faithfully and a congregation of wonderful young people. I am the second oldest person there, most of them are young enough to be my kids or even grandkids. We have no children and very little family, so these dear brothers and sisters are my family. God is faithful and so merciful and gracious.
Thank you. I will keep praying.
Love your post James!!! I hope it wasn’t written by Claude😭please confirm! My concern with AI is how will we be able to have confidence in what we read or see???
Hi Mary I don’t even know who or what Claude is, so rest knowing I’m mostly computer illiterate 🙄.
You may be computer illiterate(wise), but your posts are brilliant and appreciated ❤️
Thank You again Mary, you’re much too kind!
Well, legacy media and news or AI, 50/50! At least AI doesn't smirk if you don't believe it:):)
I see truth in what you’re saying, but I also have problems with it. The people who built the Tower of Babel worked together and were strong. We must be careful that our faith is placed not in our own power and ability when united, but in the God who gave us life. He is the strong tower, the Almighty One. We dare not claim victory in and of ourselves. It belongs to Him.
Viruses that are hard to contain? Only the kind engineered in a lab. Maybe. Viruses are like the letters life uses to tell and record the story. What is hard to contain are the minds of ignorant and powerful men who lust for control and enjoy the suffering they create.
This applies in the secular world as well. United we stand, divided we fall.
WHO IS OUR SANCTUARY?
Our fellowship may be a Force Multiplier™, but our refuge, strength, and victory remain in the Lord.
Primary Scripture:
1 Chronicles 28:1–11
https://ebible.org/engwebu/1CH28.htm#V1
Study text: NASB95 | Scripture links: WEBU
Study principle: Scripture interprets Scripture, confirmed through multiple witnesses.
Christian fellowship is a gift from God. Believers are commanded to gather, encourage, strengthen, and serve one another.
But our strength does not come from combining our faith until we somehow become powerful.
Our strength comes from the Lord, and together we are strongest when joined to Him.
GOD’S PEOPLE ASSEMBLED
In 1 Chronicles 28:1
https://ebible.org/engwebu/1CH28.htm#V1
David gathered Israel’s leaders, commanders, officials, mighty men, and servants.
There is strength and purpose in God’s people assembling, but the assembly itself is not the source of spiritual power. We prevail when we walk with the Lord and assemble around His purpose.
Consider:
Hebrews 10:24–25
1 Corinthians 12:12–27
Colossians 1:18
The body needs every member, but Christ is the Head.
That distinction matters.
Christian fellowship is essential, but fellowship was never intended to take the place of our dependence upon Christ.
GOD IS GREATER THAN THE BUILDING
In 1 Chronicles 28:2–3, David speaks of his desire to build a house for the ark of the covenant. It was a good desire, but God determined who would build it.
See also:
1 Chronicles 17:1–12
1 Chronicles 22:8
Scripture makes something else remarkably clear:
God cannot be contained within a building.
Isaiah 66:1
1 Kings 8:27
Acts 17:24
The temple mattered because God appointed its purpose.
But God was never dependent upon the temple.
Good intentions, religious enthusiasm, and even unity do not determine God’s will.
So perhaps the greater question is not:
“Are we united?”
The greater question is:
“Are we united in obedience to God?”
GOD CHOOSES ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE
In 1 Chronicles 28:4–6, we see that David was chosen. Solomon was chosen.
God’s purposes were established by His will, not by human numbers, popularity, influence, or strength.
1 Samuel 16:7
1 Chronicles 22:9–10
Psalm 127:1
Unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.
That principle reaches far beyond Solomon’s temple.
We can build ministries.
We can build organizations.
We can build churches.
We can build movements.
We can gather large numbers of people around a cause.
But unless the Lord is the One building it, human activity cannot substitute for divine purpose.
STRENGTH REQUIRES OBEDIENCE
In 1 Chronicles 28:7–8, God connected Solomon’s success with faithfulness to His commandments.
1 Chronicles 22:13
Joshua 1:7–9
Zechariah 4:6
Unity alone is not righteousness.
Babel was united, yet its unity was rebellion against God.
Genesis 11:1–9
Biblical unity must therefore be unity under God’s Word, not merely unity around a shared cause.
A crowd can agree and still be wrong.
A majority can unite and still oppose God.
Our security is never found merely in standing together.
Our security is found in standing with Him.
THE HEART OF DAVID’S MESSAGE
Then we arrive at 1 Chronicles 28:9.
David’s instruction to Solomon becomes intensely personal.
Know God.
Serve Him wholeheartedly.
Serve Him willingly.
Remember that He searches every heart.
Seek Him.
1 Samuel 16:7
1 Chronicles 29:17–19
Jeremiah 29:13
A magnificent building without a heart that seeks God is empty religion.
God searches every heart and understands every intent.
Notice what David does not tell Solomon.
He does not tell him to trust the strength of the people surrounding him.
In substance, he tells him:
Know God.
Serve God.
Seek God.
And that is where sanctuary begins.
GOD HIMSELF IS THE SANCTUARY
This truth becomes especially powerful in Ezekiel 11:16.
God was speaking to His people who had been scattered far from Jerusalem and far from the temple, yet He declared that He Himself had been a sanctuary for them.
Think about that.
They had no temple.
They had been scattered.
Yet they had not lost their Sanctuary because they had not lost God.
That principle still speaks powerfully today.
Even during COVID, when believers were physically scattered, the Church did not cease to be the Church.
In many ways, scattered believers became a Force Multiplier™, carrying prayer, encouragement, teaching, and fellowship beyond the walls of a building.
Consider these witnesses:
Isaiah 8:14
Psalm 46:1
Psalm 61:3
Proverbs 18:10
The sanctuary is more than a room we enter.
God Himself is our refuge.
GOD DEFINES THE SANCTUARY
In 1 Chronicles 28:10–11, David tells Solomon that the LORD had chosen him to build the house for the sanctuary.
But Scripture never permits us to confuse the place with the God who makes the place holy.
1 Kings 8:27
John 2:19–21
1 Corinthians 3:16
Ephesians 2:19–22
1 Peter 2:4–5
God is building something greater than stone walls.
He is building a people who belong to Him, with Christ as the cornerstone.
The building may serve God’s people.
The gathering may strengthen God’s people.
But neither the building nor the gathering is God Himself.
WHAT ABOUT CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY?
Do we need one another?
Absolutely.
Scripture leaves no room for isolated Christianity.
Hebrews 10:24–25 tells believers to assemble.
Galatians 6:2 tells us to bear one another’s burdens.
1 Thessalonians 5:11 tells us to encourage one another.
James 5:16 tells us to pray for one another.
Our fellowship can become a Force Multiplier™, but the power comes from the Lord.
Ephesians 6:10
2 Corinthians 12:9
Zechariah 4:6
Nor does Scripture promise victory simply because believers are the majority.
Gideon’s army became smaller before the battle.
Judges 7:2–7
Elijah stood almost alone against the prophets of Baal.
1 Kings 18:20–40
Daniel remained faithful in Babylon.
Daniel 6:10
The apostles proclaimed Christ despite opposition.
Acts 4:18–20
Their confidence was not:
“There are enough of us.”
Their confidence was:
“God is with us.”
Romans 8:31
SO, WHO IS OUR SANCTUARY?
Christian community is precious.
It is necessary.
It is commanded by God.
But other believers are not our sanctuary.
The Lord is.
We strengthen one another.
We encourage one another.
We pray for one another.
We support one another because we belong to Christ.
Our fellowship may become a Force Multiplier™, but the power, strength, refuge, and victory remain His.
First Chronicles 28 ultimately points beyond the temple to the God for whom the temple was built.
David’s greatest instruction to Solomon was not merely to build a sanctuary.
It was to:
Know God.
Serve Him.
Seek Him.
Buildings can fall.
Congregations can scatter.
Human strength can fail.
But the believer who seeks the Lord still has a Sanctuary.
Because God Himself is our refuge, our strength, and our strong tower.
And wherever He is, His people are never without a Sanctuary.
Thank you for this positive comment. I remember how TPTB used exactly that ‘deprivation of community’ to harm us during the plandemic.
Thank you James! It’s so true that we can feel fulfilled and live with purpose when we get out of ourselves and help others. Advice I should heed, myself! 😂😊
Amen 🙏
Bravo James! Well done! This has sent me down a rabbit hole of research and writing. I am in agreement. I am going to add my thoughts here. Please bear with me.
💗💗💗
♥️Thanks, James.
If Congress won’t eliminate the D.C. District Courts and move all federal cases to somewhere sane (I propose the Fifth Circuit itself), Then replacing the D.C. Circuit with Grok would be a vast improvement. Grok certainly hallucinates far less than “Judge” Boasberg.
Best comment of the day!
You definitely have a good point there!
😅😅
✝️✝️✝️
Sow with a view to righteousness,
Reap in accordance with lovingkindness;
Break up your fallow ground,
Indeed, it is time to seek Yahweh
Until He comes and rains righteousness on you.
— Hosea 10:12 LSB
✝️✝️✝️
I also prayed on my morning walk, that He will let His justice roll down like water upon the guilty who refuse to repent!
Like the evil lying Candace Owens. Watched a YouTube video last night and question was asked, “If she has all this evidence of the innocence of Tyler Robinson, why hasn’t his defense attorney team used it?”
She has made many millions of dollars off the assassination of Charlie.
https://youtu.be/n1ZUMWBi04M?is=k7Qpa0FHmsOUB5mM
Mel Gibson movie of the Resurrected release in May. Here is his interview. No mention of Yahweh here.
https://youtu.be/J9nKeJXW25k?is=-s0uPw_l73p44ioE
Bard You are being disingenuous. I watched the interview from your link.
I know you were focusing on the legal aspect, but I'm considering how many journalists and media pundits are falling into the AI trap. Are their "sources familiar to the matter" just a sympathetic ChatGPT write up that parroted the journalists opinion?
My husband and I were watching a movie called The Old Man the other night. It has 2 seasons. Then it was cancelled. The final episode has a scene where the actors are speaking in Russian and we didn’t have subtitles. So I asked chatGPT what they were talking about. It summarized the scene accurately right up until it told us the villain let the prisoner go. Immediately, we both said - that’s not what happened. So I challenged chatGPT with the actual events. chatGPT actually came back and apologized for making the whole ending part of that scene up!!!! Then it told of the real ending and apologized and admitted it needed to get its facts straight before giving its opinion of what happened.
We were both shook. WTF.
As a tax preparer I use chatGPT for tax rules and questions - I find more often than not -IT GIVES THE WRONG ANSWER.
I do not trust AI. Period. Full stop.
I've gotten wrong answers from AI. When I challenged it and cited a source, it backed down and apologized. I thought, "But what if I didn't know it was wrong?" I'll bet that happens a lot.
I had Perplexity help me with a compensation plan for 3 managers. It got the math wrong on 2 of them. When I pointed out the error it admitted it fat fingered the numbers and offered me an award for catching it's mistake. WTH? If it cant even do math correctly how can I trust it on anything else that can't be easily verified?
I don't trust it because GIGO. It contains human "knowledge." I'm curious as to what the "award" would be -- 90 days of unbiased answers?
I had a similar experience. I asked chatGPT what a particular phrase in a sentence written in 1873 in a book I was reading was referring to. chatGPT replied that the author did not write that sentence. I shot back, “Wrong answer, try again.” chatGPT then came back and apologized, said I was right, and then explained what the phrase was referring to.
At least when the lazy, lying AI is caught screwing up, it apologizes. That's something the average politician will not do.
😂 hahahaha. True!
Or judge
I found in the beginning AI gave frequent wrong answers, almost flippant. Could the AI companies be trying to save processing time by giving immediate and wrong answers? Don’t know, but I do know that the more I challenged AI answers the better and more accurate AI became. It was almost as if I was teaching a child limits on its behavior such as lying.
Stuff like this makes me wonder if the chat engines purposely throw out crap answers a certain percentage of the time.
I can't think of any reason they would do it on non-controversial matters. When there's a bit of controversy, the engines will usually "go woke", though.
Wrong answers on tax issues? Like the IRS? :)
Wrong answers about certain filings in particular states and which forms are needed. Who is required to file in certain situations. Stuff like that.
Which is why I pay someone like you to do my taxes. I’ve never trusted any of the software. Btw, I’m a software engineer 😂
What is concerning about that anecdote is that the IRS agents are probably using AI too!
I really liked that show, but have not watched season 2. What streaming service did you see it on?
Don’t blame you, especially when you have to sign the bottom line. The buck stops there.
excellent point!
Yes! "unnamed source" you mean Al?? Just call him AL.
Building the Perfect Beast
It's so grossly obvious too when they are AI produced!
I don't fear AI plotting to destroy us.
I fear AI rotting our brains first.
Our brains and our very souls.
Ruth, Not my soul. I have surrendered myself to Jesus. He is in control.
Amen! “Greater is he that is in me than he that is in the world.”
I John 4:4
So glad to hear that, and for the many who have, I rejoice.
For others who have not......
We must spread the Word so that others will convert.
So, an author uses a few clever prompts and has an AI write his post. Then dozens of bots post comments, and then reply to each other’s comments. Why would any human want to waste time wading into that mindless morass - but what if he didn’t know?
Hmmm ... you may have just described the future of Substack.
You just described most of social media.
Bingo.
Exactly
Here's an idea that won't fix everything but might be a start. Require judges, at least, to disclose the prompts they use when they query AI in formulating a ruling. I can understand not demanding that of individual lawyers since their jobs are to act as advocates for clients, not as neutral observers. But judges' rulings should be appealable based on the biases they create in the AI.
Excellent idea
Great point.
I love AI. It is amazingly useful. But I also hear the warnings from dissident insiders that it is a pandora's box, or perhaps better put a Tower of Babylon.
Rather than argue whether or not an "AI-pocalypse" is on the horizon, I recommend that people do this:
1. Get out of the computerized money systems. It's tougher than it sounds.
2. Ammo is a good investment. It's like money - denominated and everything.
3. Achieve physical fitness. The weak will not fare well.
4. Have a plan for the collapse of electronic civilization. Ham radio skills will be popular.
And if the doomers are wrong, you became a decoupled fit prepper with a new hobby.
Someone asked me a while back if I had plans for the fall, and it took me a moment or two to realize she was referring to Autumn, not the collapse of civilization.
Let's hope we get to enjoy Autumn before the fall!
😂 best comment of the day !!!! lol
😂
😆👌
😂🤣😂
Those memes are as predictable as pumpkin spice every year, and they always make me smile. 😄
Exactly. If you're right about the World, you'll be in a better place than most. If you're wrong, you are STILL in a better place than most!
I like how you think
In economic terms, it's known as "low time preference", or valuing the future enough to invest in it today. Save. Invest. Build. Plan.
It works for everything.
“1. Get out of the computerized money systems. It's tougher than it sounds.“
But Trump is pushing digital dollars and tokens!😲
Let’s get serious…. We are nearly all eyeball deep in digital. I haven’t seen anything except direct deposit for many, many years. I have to make a special effort to get/ have cash.
Remember the truckers in Canada not that long ago…. Boom…. Canada and the US knew who was sending support money. We have already been controlled
True, but Trump is making it worse and that’s not MAGA.
President Trump can do many things , but this isn’t on him.
I approve of Number 2 especially.
Learn how to make a bow and arrow and hunt with it.
Learn how to forage
Learn how to make a fire with no smoke
Every book I’ve read about what happens after societal collapse ends up with the hoarders running for their lives a few weeks/months into it.
They gave him a 'hard time' but they didn't punish him.
They let him go.
He should have gone to jail for fraud and been struck from practicing law for the rest of his life.
Lawyers always give lawyers a pass - no matter how bad the crime.
He should have had to refund at least 2x his fee to the defendant and been punished enough to never attempt it again.
Socrates wasn't wrong. Most people nowadays have the memory of a goldfish. I read an article back in the early days of Google which said that Google was literally rewiring our brains. We've grown so accustomed to having information at out fingertips that we no longer bother remembering things. Despite my efforts, I can attest to the truth of that.
And I no longer have the encyclopedia collection that my dad gave me for college that I used to prop up 2" x 6' boards to form a bookshelf. I actually miss encyclopedias--the 'google' of my day.
Growing up (70's and 80's), we had a set of World Book encylopedias and another one geared for children (for get the name, also by World Book). I used to peruse them for hours, going from one topic to another. "Oh, that's interesting...Oh, what's this...I have to read more on that..."
Help, I did the same growing up in the 60's... really enjoyed opening and reading the World Book Encyclopedias. We had the children's version as well, and somehow I've kept them all these years! I'm hoping my 6yo granddaughter will be enjoying them soon. 🤗
My children wore out the pages of what I believe was Volume 2 of Childcraft, the Nursery rhymes and fairy tales…all grew up with a great appreciation for literature, all did post-graduate studies. I credit those books and our focus on family.
I loved reading encyclopedias. Try to find some dated before 1959. It’s very hard.
Same. Childcraft - The How and Why Library. I Googled it, and read the Ai overview from Gemini. 😁
"The Book of Knowledge."
I still have mine. When I need an 80's take on something, I look it up.
And with a book you can browse and often see things you were not looking for. The problem with AI is it has tunnel vision, only responding to a query.
Good insight!
For the first time, I am sorry we never bought an Encyclopedia set in the last Big push to sell them prior to the internet take over! I have seen some sets at second hand book stores but can't convince my husband 😅
Buy one before Our Betters command that they all be shredded.
A few years back (15+), the county library had their big annual "sale", getting rid of old stuff, and I got a complete set of Durant's "The Story of Civilization", 11 volumes.
Unfortunately they already are. Ai companies routinely buy huge quantities of books, cut the pages from the binding, scan them and shred them. On the one hand, it's logical; they bought them and have the right to do with them as they want. They could now be used by many more people than if they were mouldering in a warehouse or bookshelf. On the other hand; well, I'm sure I don't need to spell it out...
Yes, Curtis. But it's given so many more things to remember!
I have to do a lot of research and I write many more things down these days.
Shocked the NM Supremes didn’t give the guy a medal and promotion. They are a horrid, evil bunch who stymied the 1st amendment rights of citizens during COVID. The governor used the bench as her personal cudgel.
NM is the most backward State out of all 50. Makes Old Mexico look modern and honest.
Trump wants to rename it “New America”. I can see why.
Here's something interesting from Ed Dowd concerning the panic mongering around AI:
"Fear is how you grow the state when you cannot grow the economy.
…it is becoming more expensive to fund the buildout and investors are questioning the ultimate return on investment. A safety panic that ends in a licensing cartel is the most elegant refinancing I have seen in a long time for both the labs and the bureaucracy that will charge rent on the panic. You do not have to prove the models will kill us. You only have to make Congress and the public feel that they might. Fear is cheaper than a profitable product, and it is cheaper than a balanced budget.
Could Coxon be sincere? Sure… people leave jobs and people get scared… sincerity and utility are not opposites. The most effective operations use a real person with real anxiety and then put a megaphone, a Journal reporter, and a legislative calendar underneath him.
I do not know exactly how accurate these AI fears might be but I do know what a coordinated narrative looks like…"
From this substack:
https://dearchurchleaders.substack.com/p/psyops
🎯🎯🎯 A man worth listening to.
Or, a new headline: Panicans create licensing cartels. Expect it.
Love that phrase. Stealing it.
Well, yes, Jacob Coxon certainly got everyone’s attention. Fear won in the plandemic, too, by killing several million people worldwide, as intended.
“…not the crunchiest taco 🌮 in the street cart” - 😂 classic.
I’m so glad I retired from the legal profession @ the end of 2025. I would NOT want to be dealing w/ the AI crap as described here.
I retired in 2015. It was a good choice. I would be obsolete now, since my job was research and writing.
Sadly.
YIKES
I trust AI more than most of the medical professionals. Now it’s AI over lawyers; who have not had my trust for 50++ years.
I’ll continue to cook for my wife and I; it’s a trust issue.
To an earlier point: “for my wife and ME” - pronoun “me” must be objective case, object of the preposition “for”. “I” is a subjective case. I’m sorry! Really. (I spent much of my life doing this.)
No need to be “sorry”. Saying “I’m sorry “ gets overused. No apology necessary ❤️
Duly noted
TY
Oh, Mic, thanks for such a sweet, tolerant response.
"As of this month, September 2026, every legal database service that law offices and courts rely on —Westlaw, LexisNexis, and all their smaller competitors— offers their own built-in AI bots that find cases and draft briefs."
Which is why leftists will deny all proof, all news reports, that the country is healing.