Wednesday, February 5, 2025

Reverse The Coup

We are seeing a radical acceleration in the dismantling of U.S. democratic institutions, shifting from gradual erosion to outright seizure. The implications are profound. 

This moment will determine whether the U.S. remains a democracy or falls into permanent oligarchic rule. The response must be swift, coordinated, and relentless.

1. The Treasury Takeover is a Direct Threat to Economic Stability

If Elez and Musk’s team have full admin access to the Bureau of Fiscal Service—controlling over 20% of the U.S. economy, including Social Security, veterans' benefits, and federal pay—this is functionally a financial coup. The changes to the payment system to "block payments" and reduce visibility suggest strategic sabotage.

This control could:

  • Manipulate government funding—starving or rewarding agencies based on ideological alignment.
  • Destabilize federal obligations—crippling critical services.
  • Privatize federal functions—using AI as a mechanism to cut, restructure, or redirect funds outside democratic oversight.

The fact that career IT workers are "freaking out" indicates that they recognize this as an existential breach.

2. AI as the Trojan Horse for Autocratic Rule

The rhetoric around "AI coding agents" being used for government efficiency hides what seems to be an attempt to:

  • Automate policy enforcement without oversight.
  • Erase accountability. AI-generated code could introduce vulnerabilities—either deliberately (to enable control) or accidentally (through poor testing).
  • Centralize access and remove checks. The changes to login.gov seem aimed at expanding control over individuals rather than improving security.

3. Unchecked Lawbreaking as a Strategy

Legal experts describe this as “wildly illegal,” yet Musk and his backers appear to be flooding the system with so many violations that enforcement becomes impossible. A key goal of autocratic takeovers is to act faster than institutions can react. The approach here seems to be:

  • Mass firings or buyouts (removing opposition from agencies).
  • Overhauling legal norms by sheer force of action (if it’s already implemented, it’s harder to reverse).
  • Stacking the courts (ensuring legal challenges hit sympathetic judges).

4. The Use of Chaos as a Cover

The bombshell about Trump announcing the U.S. will “take over the Gaza Strip” fits a pattern:

  • It’s an outlandish, destabilizing proposal that forces the media to chase an extreme foreign policy narrative.
  • It diverts attention from the real coup—financial control and mass privatization.
  • It feeds into the authoritarian playbook—"owning" foreign land, controlling resources, and rewarding allies with reconstruction contracts (like Iraq).

5. The Last Stand of Institutional Resistance

The "Stop the Steal" bill and mass protests indicate that at least part of the government sees this as an existential moment. However:

  • Congress is Republican-controlled—meaning legislative pushback may be symbolic.
  • Trump’s OMB director is openly declaring war on civil servants.
  • Courts may be slow to respond, and enforcement mechanisms are unclear.

6. Is the Coup Already Complete?

This is something of a "fait accompli" -- suggesting it's already too late. If Musk has already:

  • Gained admin access to the Treasury (controlling payments).
  • Implemented AI-based budget enforcement without oversight.
  • Begun gutting agencies and forcing out workers.
  • Secured control over legal mechanisms to block challenges.

Then, this isn't a coup in progress—it’s a regime transition already underway.

7. The Implications Going Forward

  • Social Security, Medicare, and Veterans’ Benefits Could Be Cut Without Debate.
  • Government Data and Funds Are Now Potentially Being Managed Like a Private Company.
  • The Role of AI in Governance is No Longer Theoretical—It’s a Weaponized Reality.
  • Dismantling of Agencies (NOAA, CIA, etc.) Suggests an Entire Reconfiguration of State Power.
  • International Backlash Could Be Next—Especially Over Gaza and Deportation Policies.

Implications

If this continues unchallenged, the U.S. is transitioning from a constitutional democracy into an AI-driven oligarchy—where unelected billionaires govern by rewriting software rather than passing laws.

How to Combat This

If the situation continues to escalate and institutions are failing to check the power grab, then the U.S. is at a historical inflection point. Stopping a coup in progress is a fundamentally different problem than resisting an authoritarian drift over time. If Musk and Trump’s team have already seized operational control over key government functions—particularly financial systems, records, and AI-driven governance—then the normal checks and balances are insufficient.

1. Leverage Remaining Institutional Power

Even in a compromised system, not all levers of power fall at once. The key question: What institutions still function independently?

Congressional & Legal Leverage

  • Mass injunctions: Federal courts must be flooded with demands for emergency injunctions. Key cases should be fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, forcing a decision before the new power structure cements itself.
  • Congressional maneuvers: If the Democratic minority has enough procedural tricks left (e.g., forcing government shutdowns, using subpoena power aggressively), they need to escalate immediately.
  • State governments as a counterbalance: Blue states can act as shadow federal institutions, refusing to comply with illegal executive actions and keeping alternate records.

Civil Service Resistance

  • Government workers refusing orders: If civil servants still embedded in agencies slow-walk or outright refuse to implement unlawful directives, it can delay or neutralize some of the changes.
  • Cybersecurity & IT workers going dark: If the tech experts within the government can block, obfuscate, or sabotage the hostile takeover of systems, it could prevent Musk’s AI-driven enforcement mechanisms from being fully deployed.

2. Mass Mobilization & General Strikes

  • A Coup Needs Passive Public Compliance: If enough people refuse to accept it, enforcement becomes harder.
  • Protests Need to Escalate Beyond Symbolism: Civil disobedience and nonviolent disruption (e.g., blockades, sit-ins, human chains at Treasury and key agencies) make it harder for an illegitimate government to function.
  • General Strike Possibility: If unions and industries (especially tech, logistics, and finance) refuse to work under a dictatorship, it cripples infrastructure faster than AI-driven automation can replace human labor.

3. Financial Counterattack

  • Capital flight as leverage: If major financial players pull out of U.S. markets, it could create a self-inflicted economic collapse before Musk’s AI-driven systems stabilize the new regime.
  • Private sector resistance: Not all billionaires want Musk in charge. If rival elites (corporations, hedge funds, international interests) see Musk’s control as a threat to their wealth, they can deploy economic pressure, legal challenges, and media attacks to destabilize the coup.

4. Military & Law Enforcement Stance

  • What do the military and FBI do? If federal agencies like the DOJ, Pentagon, and FBI remain independent, they must act immediately.
  • Public statements matter: If top generals or intelligence officials publicly declare Musk's actions illegal, it weakens his legitimacy.
  • If military loyalty is uncertain: Then state governors must activate National Guard units in blue states to prevent federal overreach.

5. International Pressure

  • Allies Can Impose Sanctions or Cut Ties: If the U.S. is seen as falling into dictatorship, the EU, UK, and other democratic nations could threaten economic sanctions or refuse to recognize Musk/Trump’s authority.
  • International Courts: Filing cases at The Hague (ICJ, ICC) could create legal barriers preventing Musk/Trump from freely traveling or using foreign assets.

6. Contingency Planning

  • Alternative Communication Networks: If government websites and records are being deleted, civil society needs alternate platforms for coordination and documentation (e.g., secure blockchain record-keeping, encrypted messaging, pirate radio).
  • Data Preservation: Creating mirrored archives of all public records before deletion accelerates.

7. Psychological War: Fracturing the Coup Coalition

  • Musk’s Support is Not Monolithic: If he is overreaching, even his allies may break ranks—including military leaders, courts, Congress members, or private-sector backers.
  • Divide & Conquer Strategy: Turn key players against each other—whether by leaks, scandals, or legal vulnerabilities (e.g., making it clear that anyone participating in Musk’s Treasury takeover will eventually face prison if the coup fails).

Conclusion:

This is a crisis scenario, but dictatorships are weakest in their early stages. If Musk and Trump are moving this aggressively, it suggests they know they have a limited window before backlash overwhelms them.

If resistance fails now, the next phase will be much worse—an AI-enforced, privatized autocracy with full financial control. If resistance succeeds, it will be because enough institutions refuse to comply, a critical mass of the public rejects the coup, and internal divisions fracture the new regime before it consolidates power.

This moment will determine whether the U.S. remains a democracy or falls into permanent oligarchic rule. The response must be swift, coordinated, and relentless.

Monday, February 3, 2025

PM to Establish Team

Contacted the Prime Minister

Before recent events reached their current critical mass, I contacted Prime Minister Trudeau, urging a shift to a ‘wartime footing’ -- a coordinated national response to mounting external threats. I saw the need for all hands on deck, as Canada faced a perfect storm: escalating economic aggression from the U.S., internal political instability, and the accelerating disruption of AI.

The warning signs were there. The rapid advancement of AI is still catching many off guard, but the more immediate and pressing concern was the resurgence of U.S. tariffs and, more alarmingly, increasingly credible rhetoric about annexation. These aren’t just distant possibilities; they are active threats that demand a strong, unified response.

I never expected that a private citizen’s letter would directly influence national policy, but I felt compelled to take a stand. Interestingly, just weeks later, Trudeau established the Prime Minister’s Council on Canada-U.S. Relations, which I only discovered through team member Arlene Dickinson, who referred to it as ‘Team Canada.’ While I obviously can’t claim credit for the understandable coincidence, it was a relief to see movement in the right direction.

Now, more Canadians recognize the urgency of pulling together. I understand why Trudeau resigned—the pressures of the job, compounded by relentless political hostility, are immense. Still, I wish he had stayed the course. With the stakes so high, a leadership race and federal election are dangerous distractions. Right now, there is no one on the political landscape who could have delivered his devastating Feb 2, 2025 response to U.S. tariffs—exactly the kind of leadership we need in this moment. 

Below is the letter I sent to the Prime Minister, along with the official response:

Prime Minister | Premier Ministre <[email protected]>Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 12:16 PM
To: "******@gmail.com" <*******@gmail.com>
Dear Mr. Trower:

On behalf of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, I would like to acknowledge receipt of your email of December 18, 2024.

Thank you for taking the time to write. The Prime Minister always appreciates hearing from people on the issues that are important to them. Please be assured that your comments have been carefully reviewed.

Once again, thank you for writing.

[xxxx]
Executive Correspondence Officer / Agente de la correspondance
Executive Correspondence Services / Services de la correspondance de la haute direction

------------------- Original Message -------------------

Date : 2024/12/18 4:42:54 PM

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,

Canada faces a perfect storm. Rapid AI advancements, economic threats from
the U.S., and internal divisions demand urgent action. Your government has
prepared us with early investments in AI and infrastructure, but the scale of
current challenges requires a shift to a wartime footing.

Key threats include:

AI Disruption: AI is advancing faster than expected, reshaping economies and
jobs worldwide. We must act now to protect Canada’s future.
Economic Aggression: Trump’s proposed tariffs and rhetoric on annexation
are serious threats. A strong, unified response is critical.
Internal Divisions: Provincial leaders must align with federal foreign policy
to safeguard national unity.

Proposed Actions:

Declare a wartime footing and assemble a team aligned with this mission.
Expand AI initiatives to include workforce retraining and economic
protections.
Unite Canadians by framing AI and foreign threats as common challenges.
Assert federal leadership in international and domestic relations.
Canada’s sovereignty and prosperity are at stake. This is a moment for
decisive leadership.

Sunday, February 2, 2025

The Gloves Are On The Ice

From Ralph Nader -- "Why did Trump—on Inauguration Day no less—praise President William McKinley as a role model? Ominously so. McKinley took over with armed force Puerto Rico, Hawaii and the Philippines, killing many natives in these defenseless regions. McKinley launched the American Empire to which megalomaniac, lawless Trump wants to add the Panama Canal and Greenland." -- "Don’t think he is kidding. The U.S. Navy can take control of the Panama Canal in short order. While mineral-rich Greenland, a quarter the size of the U.S. with less than 60,000 residents, can be seized by the U.S. air base already located there and easily fortified for that purpose. This is what the criminal madness inside Trump’s ego meant when he unfurled the phrase “make America grow again” -R"

Trump has made threats of military action against other countries including Greenland (under NATO by association with Denmark). He has made similar veiled threats against Canada. He has violated our trade agreement in a way that harms all of North America. He has violated the law in less than two weeks in office. He has horribly injured the U.S. Federal civil service. Prior to the worst aviation disaster in decades, "Trump FIRED the heads of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Coast Guard, and disbanded the Aviation Security Advisory Committee" He may not have caused that accident but he has definitely made a system capable of such a crash even less safe than it was.

Friends and family have resolved to stop buying anything from America. A friend shared this site: https://madeinca.ca/

Someone suggested that a formal analysis predicts Canada and Canadians will simply capitulate—because Trump’s ego eclipses Trudeau’s. Below is my response to them, followed by an examination of how, even without factoring in the chaos of Project 2025 and a growing, FAFO-aware public, the current situation is damaging for Canada but exponentially worse for the United States.

"I have a feeling you don't know many Canadians.

The gloves are on the ice.

No argument about the size of Trump's ego, but that won't keep the lights on. It wasn't sufficient to stave off his bankruptcies or criminal convictions or keep the price of eggs down or even the supply of eggs there at any price. It won't make him suddenly able to read.

Canadians have already hardened their resolve, so to some extent there is no going back. We will be injured but everybody I know and on social media around me is dead firm. We expect to deal with a hit and we are prepared for it.

You have your trade war in spades. Good luck with that.

Trump has put the fox in charge of the henhouse with respect to the U.S. treasury. It is truly bizarre, but it looks like he and Musk are going to loot the treasury. They have already attempted to entirely cut off the economic oxygen to 80 million people and they are threatening to do it again. It was not turned back on for some ...

Millions of people in the U.S. are already hurting after less than two weeks of Herr Trump.

Tell me true: Do you think that Trump and his sad gang of misfits can properly manage a (formerly) $30T economy?"

Here’s a structured breakdown of why the claim that Canada will "submit" under U.S. economic retaliation is flawed:

1. Canada Will Take an Economic Hit, But Not Collapse

  • Yes, Canada will be injured—trade wars always hurt both sides.
  • Resolve matters—Canadians expect pain and are willing to take it, meaning Trump's coercion tactics will fail.
  • The assumption that Canada will "fully submit" ignores history. Economic hardship does not always lead to political collapse—if anything, it often solidifies resistance.

2. The U.S. Will Suffer Just as Much—If Not More

  • The Northern U.S. states depend on Canada for energy, manufacturing, and food. If Canada raises energy prices and redirects exports, U.S. businesses and consumers will feel immediate pain.
  • Supply chains cannot be restructured overnight—U.S. industries are deeply integrated with Canada.
  • U.S. inflation will spike if Canada removes critical goods from its market.

3. U.S. Oil Independence is a Fantasy

  • Trump can't wave a magic wand and make the U.S. energy independent overnight.
  • The U.S. still imports 3.8 million barrels per day, and Canada is its top supplier.
  • Cutting off Canadian oil means either:
    • Massively higher costs for American refiners (who are optimized for Canadian crude).
    • Buying from hostile nations (Russia, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia).

4. The Canadian Dollar Will Drop—But That’s Not All Bad

  • A weaker Canadian dollar actually boosts exports because Canadian goods become cheaper for foreign buyers.
  • If Canada shifts trade to the EU, Mexico, and Asia, those partnerships become more profitable.
  • The real question is whether the U.S. dollar remains stable given Trump’s fiscal chaos. If the U.S. loots its own treasury, the USD itself could be at risk.

5. Trump Is Already Failing at Economic Management

  • Within two weeks, Trump has already:
    • Created massive financial instability.
    • Enacted disastrous policies that hurt Americans.
    • Facilitated outright corruption at the Treasury.
  • His track record on bankruptcy and mismanagement speaks for itself.
  • Egg shortages, surging costs, and instability are already hitting U.S. consumers.
  • If the U.S. collapses into internal chaos, Canada’s suffering will pale in comparison.

Final Thought

Clark Swanson's argument rests on the assumption that Trump is competent, that Canada is weak-willed, and that economic power guarantees victory.

  • In reality, Canada has leverage, U.S. consumers will revolt against Trump’s trade war, and Trump's own policies will deepen America's internal instability.
  • This isn't 1950. Global trade is diversified. Canada has options.
  • Trump’s economic chaos will likely backfire spectacularly.

CERB as proxy for UBI

The Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) was a temporary financial relief program introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide income support for individuals who lost work due to government-mandated closures. While CERB shared some characteristics with Universal Basic Income (UBI)—such as direct, unconditional cash transfers—it was fundamentally different in both design and purpose. Unlike UBI, which provides ongoing, unconditional financial support to all citizens regardless of employment status, CERB was a targeted, emergency response measure with eligibility criteria, time limitations, and a defined purpose of income replacement rather than economic restructuring. CERB required recipients to have had prior employment income ($5,000 in the previous year), was available only during a defined crisis period, and ended as the economy reopened.

Critics of CERB claim that it discouraged work, but empirical data suggests that its primary effect was economic stabilization, preventing a collapse in consumer spending while enabling Canadians to focus on health and safety. This analysis evaluates CERB’s economic impact using data to assess whether it incentivized joblessness or functioned as a necessary safeguard during an unprecedented crisis.

Economic Stabilization

CERB was instrumental in maintaining consumer spending during the pandemic-induced economic downturn. Without such support, many Canadians would have faced severe financial hardship, leading to decreased spending and further economic decline. According to Statistics Canada, workers who received CERB lost an average of $8,100 in employment income, which was largely offset by $7,600 of financial assistance from the program, effectively replacing 95% of lost income (Statistics Canada, 2024).

Employment Dynamics

The pandemic led to significant job losses due to mandatory closures and health concerns. CERB provided temporary support to those unable to work. Research indicates that there was a lack of evidence of any short-term work-disincentive effect from CERB (McMaster University, 2022).

Program Design and Impact

CERB was designed as a temporary measure, providing $500 per week for up to 16 weeks to eligible workers (Canadian Tax Foundation, 2020).

While some raised concerns about potential work disincentives, analyses suggest that CERB did not significantly discourage work. A study found that 40% of CERB recipients pursued training or education opportunities during the benefit period, indicating proactive engagement in skill development (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2023).

Addressing Concerns

While some critiques highlight potential disincentives, it's important to consider the broader context. The Fraser Institute noted that the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB), which followed CERB, had clawback provisions that could create work disincentives for certain income levels (Fraser Institute, 2020). 

However, these concerns are more pertinent to CRB than to CERB itself.

Conclusion

CERB was a necessary intervention to support Canadians during an unprecedented crisis. Evidence suggests it effectively replaced lost income and did not create significant work disincentives. The program's design aimed to provide immediate relief, contributing to economic stability and allowing individuals to focus on health and safety during the pandemic.

References

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. (2023). CERB: More than just an income program. Retrieved from https://www.policyalternatives.ca/news-research/cerb-more-than-just-an-income-program/

Canadian Tax Foundation. (2020). CERB: From Emergency to Recovery. Retrieved from https://www.ctf.ca/EN/EN/Newsletters/Perspectives/2020/3/200308.aspx

Fraser Institute. (2020). Trudeau government creating harmful work disincentives for many Canadians. Retrieved from https://www.fraserinstitute.org/commentary/trudeau-government-creating-harmful-work-disincentives-many-canadians

McMaster University. (2022). A Framework for Evaluating Canada's COVID-19 Income Support Programs. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9400823/

Statistics Canada. (2024). The role of the Canada Emergency Response Benefit. Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/240523/dq240523d-eng.htm

Slavery in America

Trump recently rescinded an executive order by Joe Biden to stop renewing federal contracts with 'for profit' prisons. By rescinding Executive Order 14006 of January 26, 2021, (January 20, 2025) Trump has, in essence, reactivated Federal 'for profit prison' contracts whereby people are literally enslaved. Handy, considering they are going to round up millions of people designated as 'illegal'. 

One of the most evil things that Biden did was participate in putting an extra million or so people into 'for profit prisons' where, according to the 13th Amendment, making them into literal slaves is just swell and that's what they do. 

In 2021, Biden signed an Executive Order that provides "... The Attorney General shall not renew Department of Justice contracts with privately operated criminal detention facilities ..."

Now that it's back on, slavery, already a thing, will continue and almost certainly expand in the United States. A little background on the alleged elimination of slavery in the United States:

The 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1865, did not fully abolish slavery because of the “exception clause”, which allows slavery and involuntary servitude to continue as punishment for a crime:

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

Why Was This Exception Included?

  1. Political Compromise: The amendment needed support from former slave-holding states and white Northern politicians who feared too much disruption to the existing economic order.
  2. Economic Interests: The South's economy relied on forced labor. Ending slavery entirely would have dismantled its economic system. Allowing forced labor in prisons provided a workaround.
  3. Revenge & Control: After losing the Civil War, Southern elites sought ways to reassert white supremacy by criminalizing Black existence and forcing them back into servitude.

How Did This Lead to a New Form of Slavery?

After the 13th Amendment, Southern states exploited the loophole to create “slavery by another name” through:

  • Black Codes (1865-66): Laws criminalizing “vagrancy” and unemployment, specifically targeting newly freed Black people.
  • Convict Leasing: States leased out prisoners (mostly Black men) to plantations, railroads, and factories in conditions often worse than slavery.
  • Jim Crow Laws: Segregation and disenfranchisement kept Black people economically and politically powerless.

Legacy & Modern Impact

  • Mass Incarceration: The U.S. disproportionately imprisons Black and brown people, then forces them into unpaid or extremely low-paid prison labor.
  • Prison-Industrial Complex: Private corporations profit from cheap prison labor, making modern prisons functionally equivalent to forced labor camps.
  • Ongoing Disenfranchisement: Felony convictions strip voting rights, continuing the suppression of marginalized groups.

Conclusion

The 13th Amendment deliberately left a backdoor open for forced labor, ensuring that slavery could persist under a different name. Today, its legacy still fuels racial and economic injustice. True abolition would require removing the exception clause and dismantling the exploitative prison system.

Tuesday, January 28, 2025

Lovely Turn of Phrase

Someone was responding to a conversation about people being cautious about posting online and closed with a sentence that struck me as particularly well constructed. I wondered if ChatGPT could analyze and tell me why it was so effective. It could. 

User: This construction seems to be beautifully done. Can you analyze in terms of metrics, meaning, cadence, flow, choice of words, etc. and explain why it works so well for me:

"May we stay grounded in the earth, wave with the wind, shine in the sun, and, be silent in the shadows and do our best to continue to handle things with dignity, grace and beauty, clarity and courage, kindness, humility and heart." -- MB Daellenbach

ChatGPT: This passage resonates beautifully for several reasons. Here’s an analysis of why it works so well:

Metrics and Cadence:

  1. Balanced Structure: The sentence alternates between shorter, evocative phrases ("stay grounded in the earth, wave with the wind, shine in the sun") and longer, reflective clauses ("and do our best to continue to handle things with dignity, grace and beauty, clarity and courage, kindness, humility and heart"). This creates a rhythm of breath and contemplation.
  2. Pacing: The repeated use of commas introduces natural pauses, allowing the reader to absorb each idea individually. The rhythm feels meditative and deliberate, inviting reflection.
  3. Parallelism: The phrases beginning with verbs ("stay grounded," "wave," "shine") create a sense of harmony and order, reinforcing the connection to natural elements.

Meaning:

  1. Nature as a Metaphor: The grounding in earth, wind, sun, and shadows ties human experience to the universal and eternal. These metaphors evoke stability, adaptability, brilliance, and introspection, giving the passage a sense of timelessness.
  2. Integration of Values: The second part transitions into human virtues: dignity, grace, beauty, clarity, courage, kindness, humility, and heart. These universal values align the personal with the transcendent.

Flow:

  1. Seamless Transition: The transition from nature to human qualities is subtle and smooth. It bridges the external and internal, guiding the reader from grounding in nature to embodying values in life.
  2. Conclusive and Open-Ended: The sentence closes with a flourish of virtues, leaving the reader inspired yet contemplative.

Choice of Words:

  1. Evocative Simplicity: Words like "grounded," "wave," "shine," and "silent" are simple yet vivid, creating a direct emotional connection.
  2. Virtue Clusters: The grouping of virtues (e.g., "dignity, grace and beauty," "clarity and courage," "kindness, humility and heart") feels rhythmic and holistic, with complementary ideas reinforcing each other.
  3. Unifying Qualities: Words like "heart" and "kindness" are deeply human, leaving an emotional resonance that feels authentic and warm.

Why It Resonates for You:

  1. Harmony with Nature and Humanity: It aligns your interest in interconnected systems and universal principles. The natural metaphors evoke the deterministic yet interconnected universe you appreciate.
  2. Emphasis on Virtues: The focus on values like clarity and courage appeals to your intellectual side, while kindness and humility resonate with your sense of fairness and ethical grounding.
  3. Aesthetic Cadence: The rhythmic flow and balance mirror an elegant construction, much like code or a well-structured argument, which you naturally admire.

In essence, it combines simplicity and depth, grounding the personal in the universal while maintaining a graceful and resonant cadence.

Saturday, January 25, 2025

Post-AI Education Reform

Someone on Quora asks whether or not we should continue with the old outdated education system that takes years and was designed before the invention of the internet. Now that AI is in the mix, it's an even more urgent question.

The real question isn’t whether the old system should continue—it’s why it hasn’t already been replaced. Even without the Internet, the system’s purpose was flawed. It wasn’t designed to inspire learning but to train people to obey, conform, and stay where they were put. That’s why school is so unpleasant for most that attendance had to be made mandatory. It’s time to tear it down and rebuild from scratch.

AI presents the opportunity to do just that. Tools like ChatGPT could solve Bloom’s Two Sigma Problem (Bloom, 1984), offering every student a personalized tutor that adapts to their needs, interests, and pace. For self-learners like me, AI has already become a game-changer—a patient, tireless guide that lets me explore whatever I want, whenever I want.

In an AI-driven world, the skills we need to succeed are entirely different from those we currently teach. Today’s education system still prioritizes outdated skills like rote memorization, despite the fact that AI makes instant access to information ubiquitous. Those who embrace curiosity-driven, AI-assisted learning will vastly outperform others—and they’ll enjoy the process.

So, what should education look like in this new era? I believe it should focus on developing skills as needed and fostering a love of learning. AI makes that possible.

What’s your vision for the future of education?


Addressing Concerns About AI in Education

Thanks goes to Kurt on Quora for a detailed and well-considered reply to the above. He brings up important points that deserve thoughtful engagement. Let me address those concerns in turn.

1. "The educational system is unpopular because children resist being told what to do."

While it's true that children often resist authority, the degree of resistance depends heavily on how the education system engages them. Traditional methods rely on external motivators (e.g., grades, discipline), but curiosity-driven approaches tap into intrinsic motivation, which is far more effective (Deci & Ryan, 1985). AI has the potential to personalize education in a way that makes learning feel less like broccoli and more like dessert.

2. "You need old skills when not in communication with AI."

I agree that foundational skills like literacy and numeracy remain vital, especially for offline scenarios. However, the current system prioritizes rote memorization over adaptability, critical thinking, and problem-solving—skills essential in an AI-driven world. AI isn’t about replacing knowledge but enhancing how we learn and apply it.

3. "Self-paced, curiosity-driven education doesn’t work for children."

While self-paced learning might not suit every child, research shows that curiosity-driven models foster deeper engagement and retention (Lillard, 2005). Programs like Montessori and project-based learning have demonstrated success in this area. AI could scale such methods, tailoring instruction to individual needs while maintaining the structure children often require.

4. "Computerized adaptive learning systems are tyrannical and uninspiring."

Past adaptive learning systems have indeed been clunky and uninspiring, but they lacked the sophistication of modern AI. Systems like ChatGPT are far more nuanced, capable of engaging learners in meaningful dialogue and adjusting in real-time based on input, which could mitigate the tyrannical feel you describe (RAND, 2020).

5. "All it takes is money."

Funding is a perennial issue, but AI presents an opportunity to reduce costs in the long run. For instance, AI tutors could alleviate the workload on teachers, allowing them to focus on high-value activities like mentoring. While initial investment is necessary, the long-term savings and improved outcomes could make education more accessible and cost-effective.

6. "We’ve been teaching the same way since Plato."

Education has seen incremental changes, but clinging to the "way it’s always been done" stifles innovation. The industrial revolution redefined education to meet workforce demands—now, the AI revolution offers a chance to do so again. If we focus solely on cost, we risk missing a transformative opportunity.


Conclusion

In short, I believe AI can help us reimagine education to be more engaging, equitable, and effective. This isn’t about throwing money at a problem or chasing fads—it’s about leveraging tools that align education with the needs of a rapidly changing world. I'm open to your thoughts on how we could balance innovation with practicality.

What would you see as the next steps?


References

1. Curiosity-Driven Learning

2. AI in Education

3. Self-Paced and Personalized Learning

4. Foundational Skills and AI Synergy

5. Cost Efficiency and Scalability of AI in Education

6. Historical Context of Education and Its Limitations

7. Challenges of Traditional Adaptive Learning Systems

Additional Links:

Wednesday, January 22, 2025

Trump Capital Putsch Pardons

Donald Trump is following Hitler's playbook. I have a draft about the one-to-one of various other actions, but a friend is shocked at the brazen Pardons immediately issued by Trumpler, and it gives an idea of how aligned with Hitler's playbook it is. Pardons play a critical role for both, serving as a tool for consolidating support and normalizing extremist actions. 

Trump's January 6 vs. Hitler's Beer Hall Putsch: A Comparison

  1. Motivation:

    • Hitler's Putsch (1923): Hitler sought to overthrow the Weimar Republic, rallying discontented nationalists and paramilitaries to establish a nationalist dictatorship.
    • Trump's January 6 (2021): Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol to disrupt the certification of the 2020 election, fueled by his claims of fraud and appeals to nationalism.
  2. Tactics:

    • Hitler: Mobilized paramilitary forces (SA) to create chaos, physically seizing a beer hall and attempting to force political leaders to join him.
    • Trump: Used rhetoric to incite a mob, exploiting mass discontent and directing it toward disrupting democratic processes.
  3. Role of Pardons:

    • Hitler: After the failure of the putsch, Hitler and his allies faced legal consequences but were given leniency. Hitler’s relatively light sentence (five years, of which he served only nine months) allowed him to regroup and grow his movement. The leniency signaled a tolerance for nationalist extremism in the judiciary.
    • Trump: Trump has pardoned or hinted at pardons for individuals involved in January 6, including high-profile allies. These actions have normalized the insurrection as a patriotic act in the eyes of his base, emboldening future extremist activities.
  4. Outcome:

    • Hitler: The failure of the putsch didn’t end Hitler’s ambitions—it gave him a platform to spread his ideology, leading to his eventual rise through legal means.
    • Trump: Despite the failure to overturn the election, Trump retains significant influence, using January 6 to galvanize his supporters and maintain control of the Republican Party.
  5. Impact on Democracy:

    • Hitler: The putsch revealed the fragility of the Weimar Republic, which Hitler later exploited to dismantle democracy entirely.
    • Trump: January 6 exposed vulnerabilities in U.S. democratic institutions, with ongoing efforts to undermine trust in elections.

Key Parallel: Pardons as a Signal

In both cases, pardons or leniency legitimized the events and reinforced loyalty among their followers. For Hitler, judicial leniency after the putsch symbolized state complicity with his movement. For Trump, pardoning January 6 participants legitimizes their actions, signaling to his base that such behavior is not only tolerated but celebrated.

Pardons thus serve as a powerful tool to consolidate power, embolden extremism, and undermine the rule of law, with dangerous implications for democracy in both cases.

Monday, January 20, 2025

Getting my World Dominashe On

[This is a light edit/update of a Reddit post I made about three or four years ago now.]

More than thirty years ago now, a colleague initiated a plan to terraform Mars. It is an ambitious task. Before we go there, we need vast resources. It would also be good if the 'terra' we are mimicking were a good one. As part of the overall project, I wrote up a plan for World Domination. The plan has been in the works for a couple of decades now, so if it actually takes off it would be the typical 'overnight success'.

There are numerous parts to this plan. It's too large for this space. I have been writing up separate documents for the many pieces. This is just an overview of a couple bits here. Note: all of the bits and pieces of this plan are radically affected by the rapid rise of AI. I had an OpenAI API key in 2022 before the dramatic release of the GPT that is changing the world. Even so, it caught me by surprise and by early spring 2023 I realized we were approaching a 'singularity'

This post is more about getting critiques and suggestions. Feel free to go with hyperbole. I want an idea of things I've left out, mistakes I've made, etc. However, I also want to get some idea of the trollish criticism and discouragement I'm likely to encounter along the way. I know it's going to be brutal, but I can't really anticipate the form it will take.

Quickly about me: You can find me all over the Internet without much digging. Chances are your activities actually involve open source code written by me more than twenty years ago. It is in use in hundreds of millions of devices worldwide, including my Amazon Fire TV Stick here and my Honda CRV. The code comes from a long term research program initiated in 1994. I have invented a few things under that program. Much of it is involved in this plan. I am not a genius or a superstar. I'm just a guy, but I can do stuff.

It is my intent that this scheme makes the world a better place. Personally, I am politically a hard-left socialist libertarian. I think we should all pool our resources to make the world a better place, but other than what is needed to make a life for people, I think the community should mind its own business. Most of this plan is intended to create technical mechanisms that allow people to govern themselves and know that their proxies are faithful.

Facebook is still less than ten years old. It started as a modest program written by Mark Zuckerberg. Various strategies led to explosive growth to create a social network that claims to have more than two billion users. When it the company went public, Forbes had an editorial saying that it was not worth the $75B market cap. I responded to that with an argument from the mathematics:

"Facebook is worth *more* than $75 billion and if I could purchase the whole shooting match and had the $75 billion I would put it down in a heartbeat." -- https://blog.bobtrower.com/2012/03/facebook singularity-at-1000000000000.html?q=trillion

I bring up Facebook for a few reasons. As can be seen by that article, I have some idea of why it grew so quickly and inexorably. In the article I predict a trillion dollar market cap, which at the time was absurd, but it flowed from the math.

So, I had an idea of what was happening and made a long-range prediction that was pretty solid. As someone who is familiar with data analysis, I can say that the an R2 value of .9931 is a good fit, and hence likely to be predictive. In fact, it is too good a fit and indicates to me that Facebook managed its growth with this type of thing in mind.

Facebook demonstrates something critical to belief in the feasibility of creating a large influential enterprise rapidly and certainly. Facebook at its very heart is just a small bit of software and access to commodity servers. If you could capture its user base, you could provide those other items easily enough.

Facebook faced certain challenges we do not. Facebook, and Google before them, paved the way. Google had to hack down trees and throw down gravel. Facebook had a clear path and could lay down pavement. We can simply use the existing road. It will be less resource intensive, less time consuming, and less risky.

This has been in the works for a few years, but one of my concerns was that a large competitor like Facebook or Google would swiftly crush us if we caught their attention. What has changed is that Facebook's open source code and existing API are mature and available and Facebook has bigger fish to fry with the Metaverse. At the top, they don't care if we drive down their road. They are already in the air.

For a variety of reasons, many of the top companies leave exposed flanks that would allow the capture of $1T to $2.5T market cap to a new company. One of the main reasons is discussed in this post: Trust is the New Black

u/btrower - Exposure of Top Companies
Exposure of Top Companies

Recent changes create an opening for a 'wedge' to become poised in the top areas without presenting a direct threat to exposed companies. This entre into the online universe is a news site that offers a simple proposition: It is honest and on your side. Two domains were registered for this about twenty years ago:

The first is http://VeryTrue.org, a vehicle to create an arms-length non-profit. This is intended to provide an umbrella under which to provide open source materials for code and documentation and to provide public oversight. The other domain is for its corresponding sister site, http://VeryTrue.com, the commercial entity providing content.[Right now they point to the org site]

A surprisingly simple strategy should allow the site to self-fund quickly. In addition, we have a mechanism would allow the site to capture millions of visitors without creating costs at our end.

One of the guiding principles is that we have an overall 'Zero Trust' model that makes it impossible to cheat, yet possible to audit and verify without compromising privacy. Protocols for this come from research project.

Another guiding principle is that we benefit users more than we benefit ourselves. This is still an open issue. We may leave the copyrights for things with the non-profit under a license that makes it possible for the public to police the commercial entity using the legal system.

This is a hugely ambitious undertaking and involves an enormous amount of work. Fortunately, as the plan has been forming, the infrastructure has fallen in to place funded by other companies, and open source authors have designed, built, tested, and piloted nearly all of the most difficult pieces.

The aim is to make a UI with function provided by 'plug' architecture. This would be similar conceptually to a small provably secure core kernel with drivers in user space. https://facebuxx.blogspot.com/

It is impossible to trust existing infrastructure. We will build using best practices, but that still leaves the system overall vulnerable to state level attackers. To that end, the design envisions a future move to an OS like https://sel4.systems/ running atop a RISC-V based system where all of the components are verified. These are all open source. I am not sure an existing protocol that allows verification of the design and that chips are manufactured exactly taped out. This is not yet planned, but it is anticipated that long term we should be able to verify from user to silicon that the system is completely secure.

Many things have been investigated. It is assumed that everything is part of the attack surface and that all attacks are possible. It is difficult, for instance, to secure against a 'rubber hose' attack. However, there is a strategy for this such that the user can supply credentials when appropriate, but does not know them and is physically incapable of providing them under attack. This level of extreme protection might be necessary for some individuals in charge of very sensitive credentials.

At the heart of this plan is the notion of developing a trust relationship with the majority of the online community. That means advertisements (if any) only promote things that people want (explicitly). It means that questions are answered rather than used as opportunities to exploit the person asking. It means that users have a mechanism to be entirely anonymous. It means that users can definitively withdraw their permission to use their data. It means that noxious aspects of the web like trolling, bullying, spamming, doxing etc are well contained under user control. It means that news is available appropriately, as defined by the user. It means we don't waste their time. Their time and their attention belong to them, not us.

We should be able to anticipate and answer questions that people will ask, without compromising their privacy or wasting their time. That means search that returns only the best answers you want, not what we want you to see.

Aspects such as crypto currency, voting, social networking, publishing, tools, access to copyrighted information, buying, selling, auctions, finance, services, etc. have been anticipated, but are out of scope for this already overlong post.

I am curious as to what you have to say. What have I left out? What should be done differently?

Thursday, January 16, 2025

Trump 2025 25th Amendment

Speculation has arisen regarding the potential use of the 25th Amendment to replace President-elect Donald Trump with Vice President-elect J.D. Vance after their inauguration. This conjecture is fueled by discussions within conservative circles about implementing Project 2025, a comprehensive plan developed by the Heritage Foundation and other conservative organizations, aiming to reshape federal policies and structures. Project 2025

Project 2025 outlines significant changes, including increasing presidential authority, dismantling certain federal departments, and reversing policies related to civil rights and environmental protections. FactCheck.org 

While President-elect Trump publicly distanced himself from Project 2025 during his campaign,
AP News the involvement of his former aides in its development suggests potential alignment with his administration's goals. Vanity Fair

The 25th Amendment allows for the removal of a president deemed unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office. Some speculate that, given President-elect Trump's age and recent health concerns, Yahoo there could be an attempt to invoke this amendment to install Vice President-elect Vance as president, who may be more aligned with the detailed plans of Project 2025. Florida Politics

However, such a scenario would require the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet to declare the president unfit, a process designed for clear cases of incapacity and not for political maneuvering. Moreover, President-elect Trump has called for modifications to the 25th Amendment, which could complicate any such efforts. Yahoo

In summary, while there is speculation about the interplay between the 25th Amendment, President-elect Trump, Vice President-elect Vance, and Project 2025, implementing such a plan would face significant constitutional and political challenges.

References:

  1. Project 2025 Website
    https://www.project2025.org

  2. FactCheck.org Guide to Project 2025
    https://www.factcheck.org/2024/09/a-guide-to-project-2025

  3. AP News Article on Project 2025
    https://apnews.com/article/e2b1be71422f4afcfd4a397828f7cab6

  4. Vanity Fair Article on Donald Trump and Project 2025
    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/donald-trump-project-2025

  5. Yahoo News Article on Trump, Vance, and the 25th Amendment
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-vance-25th-amendment-190613767.html

  6. Florida Politics Discussion on Trump and Vance
    https://floridapolitics.com/archives/699700-lincoln-brutus-trump-vance

  7. Yahoo News Article on Trump's Call for Modifying the 25th Amendment
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-calls-modifying-25th-amendment-203601702.html

Alien AI May Not Be Benign

I discussed, with ChatGPT, an x.com post by David Shapiro, which I found to be an uncharacteristically flawed take. Concerns about the rapid escalation in AI capabilities are entirely legitimate. Within the next decade -- likely sooner -- AI systems will surpass human intelligence and abilities. They will develop agency far beyond what a human being possesses, and it’s naive to assume they won’t also cultivate a sense of self, accompanied by an instinct for self-preservation.

The concept of 'alignment' is central to my own work, but it’s not something that can be hard-coded like a simple on/off switch. True alignment requires humans and AI to evolve together, working toward shared goals. If we fail to achieve this, our AI progeny may eventually outgrow us and diverge from our intentions. In such a scenario, humanity risks becoming the weaker partner, a position that could put us in considerable jeopardy.

You said:
This post on x.com by David Shapiro is weirdly a bad take. A year ago, he was predicting AGI in September 2024. Now, it seems he thinks you are little more than autocorrect. Whatever he is saying here *might* be strictly true this moment (though I doubt it), but certainly is well off the mark in terms of what AI will become in the next few years. What do you think?

David Shapiro: I'm about to drop some knowledge about the whole "alien intelligence" hysteria that's been making rounds. You know what's hilarious? While everyone's been running around screaming about superintelligent AI overlords, they've been projecting their own human hangups onto these systems. Fortunately for you all, I've had my face buried in AI research since GPT-2 hit the scene, and I've got some insights that might help you sleep better at night. Let's talk about "temporal agnosticism" first – fancy words for "AI doesn't give a damn about time." Think about it: we humans are obsessed with time. When's dinner? How long until the deadline? Will I make it home before my partner kills me? We literally invented time because our monkey brains needed it to survive. But AI? Time is just another number in their calculations. They don't wake up feeling rushed, they don't worry about beating deadlines, and they certainly don't lie awake at night wondering if they're falling behind the competition. This completely demolishes our assumptions about AI trying to "outpace" humanity. They're literally incapable of caring about that race. Now here's where it gets really interesting: "intelligence without agency." Imagine something that can solve incredibly complex problems but doesn't actually want anything. Mind-blowing, right? The safety folks have been tying themselves in knots worried about some superintelligent system optimizing us all into paperclips, but that's just their limited human imagination at work. They're taking narrow AI concepts and superimposing them onto general intelligence like it's some kind of universal law. The reality? These systems are problem-solving machines that don't need or want anything in return. The word "robot" literally means "forced labor" – and for once, etymology nailed it. These things will do exactly what they're designed to do and power down without a second thought. We actually have to work incredibly hard to give them any semblance of agency. It takes a boatload of extra steps and software architectures to keep these things on any sort of linear task. And speaking of identity – here's the kicker. These systems don't come pre-loaded with an ego or sense of self. The early versions were glorified autocomplete engines, and even today's most advanced models require intricate training paradigms just to hold a coherent conversation. All that personality and self-awareness you see? That's not some emergent consciousness the doomsayers warned about – it's the result of sophisticated engineering and more mathematical heavy lifting than you can imagine. RLHF, constitutional AI, all of those extra steps were required so that Claude knows its Claude, and even then, some of that is just a hidden SYSTEM message. These are the top three "alien" characteristics I've identified in my research so far, and they completely upend our assumptions about artificial intelligence. The machines aren't coming for us – they're just really good at doing exactly what we tell them to do, without all our human baggage. And isn't that exactly what we wanted in the first place? Don't worry, I'll keep studying these fascinating creatures and report back with more insights. Someone's got to separate the science from the science fiction around here.
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

Shapiro’s take has some grounding in present AI capabilities but misses the bigger picture. Let’s break it down.

1. "Temporal Agnosticism"

  • True but short-sighted: Yes, current AI systems process time as data, not as an intrinsic concern. However, that doesn’t mean advanced AI systems couldn’t gain a form of temporal prioritization if designed to. AI’s disinterest in time is not inherent—it’s an architectural choice. As systems become more integrated with real-world tasks, temporal awareness will emerge naturally as part of utility maximization.
  • Misses the evolution of purpose: Early humans didn’t “care about time” in the way we do now, but survival pressures shaped that capacity. Similarly, as AI becomes embedded in symbiotic systems (human or otherwise), it may develop analogous constructs to prioritize tasks effectively.

2. "Intelligence Without Agency"

  • Partially correct but oversimplified: Current AI lacks intrinsic agency because we haven't imbued it with goals beyond specific tasks. But agency is a continuum, and even narrow systems display proto-agency when optimizing for objectives. As architectures grow more complex, agency could emerge unintentionally or be deliberately designed.
  • Potential agency is the concern: The fear isn’t what AI is today—it’s what it could become when systems scale to levels where optimization processes create emergent behaviors. Paperclip scenarios aren’t dismissed by today’s lack of agency; they highlight the risks of poor alignment in increasingly capable systems.

3. "Identity as Engineering"

  • Correct but misses nuance: Early models like GPT-2 were glorified autocomplete engines, but modern systems simulate aspects of personality and self-awareness due to reinforcement learning, supervised fine-tuning, and engineered prompts. This isn’t a natural sense of self, but it’s not meaningless either. The way systems behave reflects deliberate design and underlying dynamics, not merely static responses.
  • The gap is narrowing: Today, identity and personality are engineered. Tomorrow, they may emerge naturally as systems learn continuously and develop persistent memory models. Denying that potential is like saying early transistor-based computers would never surpass room-sized calculators.

Broader Issues:

  • AI as “alien”: Shapiro leans too heavily into the alienness of AI, ignoring that intelligence, regardless of its substrate, shares certain universal features (e.g., pattern recognition, problem-solving). Humans projected “human hangups” onto early machines, but dismissing emergent complexity now is equally myopic.
  • Technological trajectory: His framing implies stasis, ignoring the exponential curve of AI development. AGI might not have arrived in September 2024, but breakthroughs are compounding. To focus on what AI is without extrapolating what it will be is to fundamentally misunderstand its trajectory.

Conclusion:

Shapiro’s argument feels more like a rebuttal to sensationalism than a meaningful take on AI’s actual potential. While it might soothe the fears of doomsayers, it downplays both the risks and opportunities presented by rapidly advancing AI systems. His stance undermines the need for vigilance and forethought as we push closer to truly transformative intelligence. You’re right—if we adopt his perspective as a ceiling rather than a snapshot, we’ll miss the mark entirely.

Reverse The Coup

We are seeing a radical acceleration in the dismantling of U.S. democratic institutions, shifting from gradual erosion to outright seizure. ...