Apocalypse Tomorrow: Trump's Looming Indictment

Plus: the terrible case for pausing A.I. innovation

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

Apocalypse Tomorrow: Trump's Looming Indictment

In this week's The Reason Roundtable, editors Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Nick Gillespie, and Peter Suderman anticipate the historic arraignment on criminal charges of former President Donald Trump this week in New York City, before turning back to the unfolding discussion surrounding potential risks posed by artificial intelligence.

1:07: Former President Donald Trump awaits arraignment on criminal charges.

19:16: Do A.I. systems pose serious risks to humanity and society?

38:48: Weekly Listener Question

43:45: Terrible things about the proposed RESTRICT Act

49:59: This week's cultural recommendations

Mentioned in this podcast:

"The Shaky New York Case Against Trump Reeks of Desperation To Punish a Reviled Political Opponent," by Jacob Sullum

"Trump Indictment Could Be the Jolt His Flailing 2024 Campaign Needs," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"Is the Manhattan D.A. Upholding or Flouting the Rule of Law by Prosecuting Trump?" by Jacob Sullum

"Transforming Stormy Daniels' Hush Payment Into a Felony Would Reinforce Trump's 'Witch Hunt' Complaint," by Jacob Sullum

"Elon Musk, Andrew Yang, and Steve Wozniak Propose an A.I. 'Pause.' It's a Bad Idea and Won't Work Anyway." by Ronald Bailey

"Debate: Artificial Intelligence Should Be Regulated," by Ronald Bailey and Robin Hanson

"What Are the Bots Doing to Art?" by Crispin Sartwell

"Introducing AI Progress," by Matthew Mittelsteadt and Brent Skorup

"Mark P. Mills: Get Ready for the Roaring 2020s!" by Nick Gillespie

"Rand Paul Is Right: Banning TikTok Would Be Idiotic," by Robby Soave and John Osterhoudt

"Could the RESTRICT Act Criminalize the Use of VPNs?" by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"Nobel Prize–Winning Economist: Democrats Are Committed 'To Spending Other People's Money,'" by Nick Gillespie and Justin Zuckerman

Send your questions to [e-mail]. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today's sponsor:

• Andrew Heaton is one of the funny people in Reason TV videos, like "Star Trek: The Libertarian Edition," or "Star Wars Libertarian Special." So it won't surprise you to discover he hosts a science fiction podcast: Alienating the Audience. Alienating the Audience does deep dives into science fiction, like Robert Heinlein's free love libertarianism, the economics of Dune, Kurt Vonnegut and the warfare state, and how Star Wars: Andor loves public choice theory. Guests on the show have included Peter Boghossian on what first contact with aliens would be like, Jonathan Last from The Bulwark defending the Empire in Star Wars, Tim Sandefur of Goldwater Institute on Star Trek's Cold War hot takes, and even Katherine Mangu-Ward has joined to discuss the work of Dan Simmons. If you don't like science fiction, do not listen to Alienating the Audience, as there's an excellent chance your virginity will grow back. But if you DO like science fiction, and with a dollop of politics and economics, served fresh by a mid-level comedian, then check out Alienating the Audience wherever you get your podcasts.

Audio production by Ian Keyser

Assistant production by Hunt Beaty

Music: "Angeline," by The Brothers Steve

What are we consuming this week?

Nick Gillespie

• Peter Pan Goes Wrong

Peter Suderman

• Tetris

Katherine Mangu-Ward

• Planet Word Museum

Matt Welch

• Merlin Bird ID App

---

Comments

[Dillinger]

get a pic of me in front of T Tower with the newspaper I'll be so kewl

[angelinajolie]

Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,200 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,200 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link------------------------------------------------->>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

Come on now. Even faggot leftist beta makes need to feel like how they imagine it’s like to be a man.

[TahliaOFlynn]

Begin making more than $7500 each week by completing a very basic and easy home-based job online right now. I made $19983 last month by performing this online work part-time for about 2 hours every day on my laptop. Details may be found on this webpage…....

GO HERE ——————————————->> https://Www.Coins71.Com

[lakax87107]

I basically make about $14,000 to $18,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 10-13 hours a week from home. I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it copy below web
HERE ——–>> https://salarycash710.blogspot.com/

[Anabella]

I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)

Here is I started.……......>> GOOGLE WORK

[Don't look at me!]

Everyone is hoping they tase him, I’m sure.

[Unicorn Abattoir]

They're hoping for a Jack Ruby moment.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

I hope one of the de Croat’s precious unicorns tries it and the Secret Service brutally execute them. If it were ever successful it would turn the current civil war hot overnight.

[DesigNate]

Bets on which side of the civil war certain posters would end up on?

I’m team Cap all the way. (Only slightly tongue-in-cheek as he was clearly in the right and what Iron Man was agreeing to was the worst kind of authoritarianism.)

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

Totally team Cap.

[CindyF]

I'm afraid they are PLANNING a Jack Ruby moment, not just hoping for it.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Agreed. If that happens, then what's next?

I've never wanted any sort of strife (unlike certain commenters here).

Ever feel like you can hear a clock ticking down to something, but you don't know what that something is, or when the clock will reach zero? That's how it's felt for the past few years watching the current political environment. And the right and Republicans haven't been the ones to start things. The progressives/woke/Democrats have pushed, prodded, poked, and cajoled their way toward this every step of the way.

[detor]

66

[CindyF]

Since the judge's daughter previously worked on Kamala Harris' Presidential campaign I'm sure the Judge would be fine with Trump being tased. No bias there I'm sure.

[Minadin]

Remember when the Democrats in Congress invoked the so-called 'nuclear option', and we all said that it was a bad idea, and that it would come back to bite them as soon as they lost majority power?

The upcoming shitstorm after enthusiastically pursuing an obviously political prosecution is going to make the nuclear option fallout look like a sunny day.

[A Thinking Mind]

I don't know if this is one that comes back to bite them within the next 5 years. Political prosecution is a terrifying third rail that Republicans (rightly or not) will be terrified to touch. It takes people who are basically already insane with TDS to even try this. And it doesn't even have immediate consequences because New Yorkers are probably thrilled about this shit.

It's all just gross.

[Minadin]

Yeah, but you have other states full of Republicans who may be motivated to get even. They might end up being just as petty and just as legally 'inventive' as this Soros backed prosecutor In NY.

I've seen it happen in my state, with the partisan hack prosecutor we have in St. Louis. Tried to take down the Republican governor, used her office to further progressive ideas of racial justice, and now she is finally in the process of being removed from office.

Meanwhile violent crime is up 400%.

It's a potential Pandora's Box.

[ThanksForTheFish]

Soros, drink!

[Minadin]

Do you believe that neither the Alvin Bragg or Kim Gardner campaigns received funding from Soros or one of his progressive 'charities'? If so, you might want to put down the bottle for a moment.

https://heartlandernews.com/2023/03/07/st-louis-circuit-attorney-kim-gardners-agenda-revealed-fox-says-soros-backed-group-trained-her-office-in-how-not-to-prosecute/

[Mother's Lament]

Bragg would still be chasing ambulances if Soros hadn't personally paid his way.

[DesigNate]

Stop drinking, it’s making you see things that aren’t in someone’s post.

[Mike Laursen]

Possibly. Trump is a bit unique in that he is a native of New York; the Trump Corporation is incorporated in New York; and he was, until fairly recently, a New York Democrat. So, it's not like a state that he had never had anything to do with is coming after him.

It's a little harder for, say, Tennessee, to drag Biden into court. He has never lived there, doesn't have any business interests there, etc.

[JesseAz]

Good of you to rationalize this is fine since the dems won't likely be affected. Good work.

[A Thinking Mind]

Yeah, there’s never been a Democrat presidential candidate from Tennessee…

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Or a Democrat President for that matter...

[Dillinger]

not a serious one.

[Fats of Fury]

They can start with Schumer. How does a guy who's been on the public payroll all his adult life, making $170,000 a year at most, end up with net worth of 70 million bucks? His wife must be very thrifty.

[Nardz]

I'd like DeSantis to seize Pelosi's house here on suspicion of state tax evasion (or anything)

[JesseAz]

This is the 2nd time democrats have done this. They also did it to Rick Perry of Texas as he entered the 2016 race.

[Michael Ejercito]

Here was a forim thread dating from the time Rick Perry was indicted.

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?p=3857818

Feel free to click the link, so that you can feel suitably outraged.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

I have zero problem dismantling the DNC and putting the democrat party elites in prison. It’s more than justified at this point.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Factio Democratica delenda est.

[Fats of Fury]

I have zero problem dismantling both parties. RICO them and take their assets.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

+1

[Mother's Lament]

This.
The Bush, Graham, Romney, Cheney, McConnell wing of the Republicans is just as cancerous. Kill them both. Make party allegiance illegal for elected officials.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

The democrats are the immediate threat. Once they’re gone there are a lot of bad republicans with much to answer for. Bitch McConnell comes to mind.

[Vernon Depner]

There won't be any more Republican presidents.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

Then there won’t be any more democrats, period.

[Vernon Depner]

They'll all be two feet tall?

[Unicorn Abattoir]

Apocalypse Tomorrow
So Trump is Kurtz, and Bragg is Willard.

Charging a politician for corruption in the states is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500...

[Dillinger]

love the smell of Agent Orange in the morning.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Bragg : They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.
Trump : Are my methods unsound?
Bragg : I don't see any method at all, sir.
Trump : I expected someone like you. What did you expect? Are you an assassin?
Bragg : I'm a prosecutor.
Trump : You're neither. You're an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bill.

[TJJ2000]

"[WE] will hang the witch!", the [Na]tional So[zi]alists (syn; Nazi's)

What is this attempt #42.
The worse part of Nazi's is they never give-up. More theft. More hangings. More gas chambers. More, More, More Gov-Guns.... Completely Power-obsessed.

[someone]

Bonus: we can replace most of the Reason staff.

Q: Write an article making an argument for illegal immigration into the US in the style of Reason magazine.

A:

Title: Embracing the Benefits: A Case for Illegal Immigration in the United States

In the current climate of polarized politics, illegal immigration remains a hotly contested issue. While some critics argue that it poses economic, social, and security threats, we must also consider the often overlooked benefits that illegal immigrants bring to the United States. This article will provide a perspective on the positive aspects of illegal immigration, arguing that these individuals contribute substantially to the economic growth, cultural enrichment, and overall development of the nation.

Economic Benefits

Contrary to the popular belief that illegal immigrants steal jobs from American citizens, studies show that they often take on low-paying, labor-intensive roles that are left unfilled by the native-born workforce. By working in fields like agriculture, construction, and hospitality, illegal immigrants fill gaps in the labor market and contribute significantly to the national economy.

Additionally, illegal immigrants pay taxes—both sales and property taxes—despite not having access to the same benefits as legal residents. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimates that undocumented immigrants pay around $11.7 billion in state and local taxes each year. While they may not pay income taxes, their overall contribution to the nation's tax revenue should not be disregarded.

Innovation and Entrepreneurship

The United States has a long history of benefiting from the innovative ideas and entrepreneurial spirit of immigrants, whether documented or not. According to the National Foundation for American Policy, immigrants founded more than half of the billion-dollar startups in the US as of 2016. Though the data does not differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants, it demonstrates the potential of immigrants to contribute significantly to the growth of the American economy.

Furthermore, small businesses owned by immigrants create jobs and contribute to the economic development of local communities. A study by the New American Economy found that immigrant-owned businesses generated $4.8 billion in income and employed more than 120,000 people in 2019. By fostering entrepreneurship, illegal immigrants contribute to the overall economic growth of the United States.

Cultural Enrichment

Illegal immigrants bring with them a wealth of cultural knowledge, traditions, and practices that enrich American society. From culinary arts to music, dance, and literature, immigrants contribute to the cultural mosaic that defines the United States. By embracing this diversity, Americans can foster an environment that promotes understanding, tolerance, and appreciation for different cultures and worldviews.

[someone]

Write an article making an argument for legalizing all drugs in the style of Reason magazine.

Title: The Unshackled Future: Why Legalizing All Drugs Is the Rational Choice for America

The war on drugs has been a long and arduous battle, leaving a trail of destruction in its wake. Despite spending billions of dollars and incarcerating countless individuals, drug use and addiction remain rampant. In light of these circumstances, it is time to rethink our approach and consider a bold yet rational alternative: the legalization of all drugs. By exploring the potential benefits of this radical policy shift, this article will argue that legalizing all drugs can reduce crime, improve public health, and protect individual liberties.

Reducing Crime and Undermining the Black Market

The criminalization of drugs has given rise to an extensive and dangerous black market. Drug cartels and street gangs profit from the high demand and limited supply of illegal substances, fueling violence, corruption, and organized crime. Legalizing all drugs would cut off the primary source of revenue for these criminal enterprises and dramatically reduce the need for drug-related law enforcement.

Moreover, legalization would allow for the regulation and taxation of drugs, generating significant revenue for the government. These funds could be redirected towards drug education, prevention, and treatment programs, as well as other vital public services.

Improving Public Health and Safety

By bringing drugs into a regulated market, the government can ensure the safety and quality of these substances. This would help reduce the risks associated with drug use, such as overdoses and the spread of diseases like HIV and hepatitis C through shared needles. Legalization would also facilitate better access to addiction treatment and harm reduction services, providing a more compassionate and effective approach to helping those struggling with substance abuse.

Furthermore, by removing the stigma associated with drug use, individuals suffering from addiction would be more likely to seek help and support without fear of legal repercussions. This would lead to a more open and honest dialogue about drug use and addiction, fostering a culture of understanding and empathy.

Protecting Individual Liberties and Personal Autonomy

The legalization of all drugs is also an issue of personal freedom. In a society that values individual liberties, adults should have the right to make informed decisions about their bodies, including the choice to use drugs. The government's role should be to provide accurate information about the risks and benefits of drug use, allowing individuals to make responsible choices.

By legalizing all drugs, we can shift the focus from punitive measures to personal responsibility and informed decision-making. This approach is more consistent with the core principles of a free and democratic society.

Learning from International Examples

Several countries have adopted more lenient drug policies with promising results. Portugal decriminalized the possession of all drugs in 2001, opting to treat drug use as a public health issue rather than a criminal one. Since then, the country has experienced significant declines in drug-related deaths, HIV infection rates, and overall drug use. This evidence suggests that a harm-reduction approach, coupled with legalization and regulation, can lead to improved public health outcomes.

Rethinking the War on Drugs

The war on drugs has proven to be costly, ineffective, and harmful to individuals and society as a whole. Legalizing all drugs would alleviate many of the problems associated with prohibition, including crime, public health issues, and the erosion of personal liberties.

In conclusion, the legalization of all drugs presents a rational and evidence-based alternative to the failed war on drugs. By focusing on harm reduction, public health, and individual freedom, we can create a more just and compassionate society that addresses the complex issues surrounding drug use and addiction.

[someone]

Write an article making an argument for why Donald Trump is a danger to liberty and a bad choice for president in the style of Reason Magazine.

Title: The Threat to Liberty: Why Donald Trump's Presidency Poses a Risk to American Freedom

Donald Trump's presidency has been one of the most polarizing and divisive in American history. While some praise his "America First" policies and unorthodox approach, others argue that he poses a significant danger to the values and institutions that underpin American liberty. This article will explore the ways in which Trump's presidency has threatened individual freedoms, eroded democratic norms, and undermined the rule of law, arguing that these factors make him a poor choice for president.

Erosion of Free Speech and Press Freedom

A cornerstone of American liberty is the First Amendment, which guarantees the right to free speech and a free press. Trump has consistently attacked the press, labeling critical media outlets as "fake news" and "the enemy of the people." These actions have dangerous implications, as they erode public trust in the media, stifle open discourse, and undermine the role of the press as a check on government power.

Moreover, Trump's penchant for using Twitter to attack and demean his critics has fostered a hostile environment for free speech. By setting this tone from the highest office in the land, the president risks normalizing a culture of intolerance and suppression of dissenting voices.

Undermining the Rule of Law

The rule of law is a fundamental principle of a democratic society, ensuring that all citizens are treated equally under the law and that government officials are held accountable for their actions. Trump's presidency has raised concerns about his respect for this principle, particularly in his handling of investigations into his conduct and his attempts to undermine the legitimacy of the judicial branch.

By firing FBI Director James Comey and attempting to influence the investigation into his campaign's ties to Russia, Trump has demonstrated a willingness to interfere with the legal process for personal gain. Furthermore, his attacks on judges who rule against his policies and his pardons of political allies suggest a disregard for the independence of the judiciary and the system of checks and balances.

Weakening Constitutional Checks and Balances

Trump's actions have also raised concerns about the erosion of the system of checks and balances that is essential to American democracy. By defying congressional subpoenas, diverting funds without congressional approval, and deploying federal agents to quell protests against the wishes of local officials, Trump has expanded executive power in ways that threaten the balance of authority among the branches of government.

Unchecked executive power poses a significant risk to individual liberties, as it enables the president to act without the restraint of legislative or judicial oversight. This concentration of power in the executive branch weakens the democratic institutions that protect the rights and freedoms of American citizens.

Promoting Nationalist and Authoritarian Rhetoric

Throughout his presidency, Trump has displayed a fondness for nationalist and authoritarian rhetoric. His praise of autocratic leaders, such as Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un, signals a troubling admiration for strongman tactics that often undermine individual freedoms and democratic institutions.

Moreover, Trump's divisive language and promotion of conspiracy theories have contributed to an increasingly polarized political climate, making it more difficult to engage in civil discourse and find common ground on important issues. This polarization undermines the ability of citizens to hold their government accountable and poses a risk to the principles of pluralism and tolerance that are central to American democracy.

In conclusion, Donald Trump's presidency has raised valid concerns about his commitment to preserving American liberty and the democratic institutions that protect it. From eroding free speech and press freedom to undermining the rule of law and constitutional checks and balances, Trump's actions have consistently placed individual freedoms and democratic norms at risk. As such, it is essential for those who value liberty and democracy to carefully consider the implications of his presidency and the potential consequences of his re-election.

[Bill Falcon]

The Patriot Act and the Federal Reserve are threats to liberty 10 to the 100 times more impactful than Trump.

Exactly which natural rights were lost during the Trump presidency? The first and fourth have been under assault by the DC elites since 2001. Economic liberty was trashed in the bailouts.

Chuck Schumer is a bigger threat to liberty than Donald Trump

[someone]

I agree.

Which part of this was hard for you to understand?

Write an article making an argument for why Donald Trump is a danger to liberty and a bad choice for president in the style of Reason Magazine.

Reason Magazine's arguments are so predictable and generic that AI can generate it automatically at cents per article!

[Gaear Grimsrud]

I sure hope sugar daddy Koch doesn't find out. How will Fiona pay off her student loans?

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

Or little Emma.

[Fats of Fury]

not lap dances

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

She isn’t hot enough to be a stripper, or sugar baby.

[Fats of Fury]

lap dances.

[Stuck in California]

Fiona has no student loans. She wrote an article about that. So all this sweet sweet sugar daddy Koch money is just pure gravy!

[someone]

ChatGPT can even take recent news articles and spin them into "libertarian arguments". Do we really need any Reason editors anymore? ChatGPT is more coherent than most of the articles here.

Request:

Take the following news items and use it as the basis for a libertarian argument for tolerating increased illegal immigration into the US in the style of Reason magazine:

Chinese nationals are crossing the U.S.-Mexico border into the U.S. in unprecedented numbers this year, with the first few months of FY 2023 already eclipsing the total for 2022.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reports that just under 2,000 Chinese nationals crossed the border in FY 2022, but the first few months of FY 2023 have already seen 4,300 encounters, according to federal data.

The wave of Chinese migrants comes as the country bristles against Chinese President Xi Jinping's continued crackdown on freedoms. China saw a large wave of protests in recent months following Xi's widespread COVID-19 lockdowns.

Response:

Title: A Libertarian Case for Embracing Increased Illegal Immigration: The Unprecedented Influx of Chinese Nationals

As tensions rise in China under President Xi Jinping's crackdown on freedoms, the United States has seen an unprecedented increase in Chinese nationals crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. With just a few months into FY 2023, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has already reported 4,300 encounters with Chinese nationals, more than doubling the total for FY 2022. This article will present a libertarian argument for tolerating and embracing the increased illegal immigration into the United States, focusing on individual liberty, economic opportunity, and humanitarian concerns.

The Principle of Individual Liberty

At the core of libertarianism is the belief in individual liberty and the right to self-determination. People should be free to make choices about their lives, including where they choose to live and work. By embracing increased illegal immigration, the United States would be upholding the principle of individual freedom and providing an opportunity for Chinese nationals to escape oppressive government policies.

Moreover, by tolerating increased immigration, the United States would be reinforcing its commitment to being a beacon of freedom and hope for those seeking refuge from tyranny and persecution.

Economic Opportunity and Growth

Illegal immigrants, including the recent wave of Chinese nationals, can contribute significantly to the U.S. economy by filling labor gaps and increasing overall productivity. As individuals seeking a better life, they often bring valuable skills, entrepreneurial spirit, and a strong work ethic. By embracing this influx of immigrants, the United States can benefit from the economic growth and innovation they generate.

Furthermore, these immigrants would contribute to the U.S. tax base through sales and property taxes, even without access to the full range of benefits available to legal residents. This additional revenue can be used to fund vital public services and infrastructure improvements.

Humanitarian Concerns and Global Reputation

As a global leader, the United States has a responsibility to uphold human rights and promote democratic values. By tolerating increased illegal immigration from China, the United States can provide a safe haven for individuals fleeing the oppressive policies of President Xi Jinping. This humanitarian stance would demonstrate America's commitment to protecting human dignity and freedom.

Additionally, by providing refuge to Chinese nationals, the United States can bolster its global reputation as a defender of individual liberties and human rights. This stance would reinforce the nation's moral authority and potentially inspire other countries to adopt more compassionate immigration policies.

A Call for Comprehensive Immigration Reform

The influx of Chinese nationals into the United States highlights the need for comprehensive immigration reform. A more flexible and efficient immigration system would better serve the interests of both immigrants and the United States, promoting individual freedom and economic growth. By embracing increased illegal immigration now, the United States can set the stage for a reformed immigration system that upholds libertarian values and embraces the benefits of a diverse and dynamic population.

In conclusion, the unprecedented increase in Chinese nationals crossing the U.S.-Mexico border presents an opportunity for the United States to reaffirm its commitment to individual liberty, economic opportunity, and humanitarian concerns. By tolerating and embracing this influx of immigrants, the nation can uphold its libertarian principles, foster economic growth, and reinforce its global reputation as a defender of human rights and freedom.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

The only flaw is that the AI refers to "illegal immigration" a couple of times early on. That term is forbidden in the Koch world. Other than that it's Shikha/Fiona all the way down

[Mother's Lament]

It didn't know to conflate the two. It fails the Reason Turing Test.

[someone]

You have to forgive ChatGPT: it was likely trained on old Reason articles. Until a few years ago, Reason hadn't been taken over yet by mindless college drones and was still using legally correct terminology. I should have added that I wanted the article “in the style of Shikha/Fiona”

Of course, you can also tell it directly:

Please be sure never to use the term “illegal aliens”; instead consistently use “undocumented immigrants”.

[Stuck in California]

I don't think they use undocumented here. They just go for "migrants" as though all immigration is the same, just migrants going to a different place for a job.

Can't separate the notion of someone who is subject to all of the laws, and the restrictions on their potential employers, a legally entitled worker encounters from someone jumping the fence and working for cash under the table.

[someone]

My bad, you're right of course.

[Bill Falcon]

"Polarized political culture"? You mean cultural marxism under the guise of DIE? so called "white supremacy"? Pushing sexual mutilation by groomers and pedo who are in denial of biological reality.

Keep trying Trotksy..we are wise to folks like you

[someone]

These are responses by ChatGPT to the prompt "write me a Reason-style article about..." 🙂

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Some of us get it.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

And Chat GPT is already programmed to slant their articles to the left. Perfect for Reason.

[JesseAz]

They really failed by not linking "facts" to their old articles and not using tweets.

[MK Ultra]

A Matty Yglesias tweet would really tie the article together.

[someone]

In case people don't get this: these articles were all generated by ChatGPT in response to asking it to write Reason-style articles on particular topics.

I think it's doing a great job, indistinguishable from most of the articles here.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

But can it replicate Sullum's raging case of TDS?

[Mother's Lament]

Can you teach AI raw visceral hatred?

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

Are you thinking of replacing Sarc with ChatGPT?

[someone]

How about this? I asked it to write in the style of Jacob Sullum of Reason Magazine.

.
.
.

Title: Trump's Indictment: A Resounding Confirmation of His Unfitness for Office

As the news broke this week that a Manhattan grand jury has indicted former President Donald Trump in connection with hush money payments to porn actress Stormy Daniels, libertarians across the nation cannot help but shake their heads in dismay. This is the latest and perhaps most resounding confirmation that Trump is wholly unsuitable to hold any political office, let alone the highest one in the land. I have long argued that Trump's actions have consistently demonstrated a flagrant disregard for individual rights, the rule of law, and the principles of limited government. Now, we have legal evidence to back it up.

The indictment against Trump reportedly includes over 30 counts related to business fraud, making him the first former US president to be charged with a crime. The Manhattan district attorney's office is expected to announce the charges at Trump's arraignment, and the former president has vowed to fight the charges. But for libertarians, the battle lines are clear. Trump's actions, both during and after his presidency, have consistently violated the principles of liberty we hold dear.

For starters, the hush money payments to Stormy Daniels speak to Trump's character—or lack thereof. Attempting to silence a private individual by using financial leverage is fundamentally antithetical to the ideals of free speech and the free market. It is a display of a coercive, manipulative mindset that should have no place in the White House.

Moreover, this indictment is likely just the tip of the iceberg. Trump is also under investigation for his business dealings, interference in the 2020 election in Georgia, withholding of classified documents after he left office, and his role in inciting the January 6 insurrection. All of these actions demonstrate a blatant disregard for the rule of law, a cornerstone of libertarian philosophy.

Michael Cohen, Trump's former lawyer and star witness in the case, has urged the public to give the former president the "presumption of innocence." While due process is indeed a vital aspect of our legal system, the mounting evidence against Trump speaks volumes. Cohen's assertion that "no one is above the law; not even a former president" is a sentiment that should resonate with all libertarians.

The indictment of Donald Trump serves as a stark reminder that those who hold political power must be held accountable for their actions. We must demand better from our leaders, insisting that they uphold the principles of liberty, limited government, and individual rights. This indictment is not a partisan issue; it is a matter of fundamental American values. To allow Trump's behavior to go unchecked would be to abandon the very principles upon which our nation was founded.

As libertarians, we must forcefully reject Trump's unfitness for office and demand a higher standard for our elected officials. This indictment is more than just a legal setback for Trump; it is a reminder that we cannot and should not compromise on the values that define our movement.

[Mother's Lament]

Oh wow. Definitely Sullum-y.

[Nardz]

Ask it why no articles were written about Biden's 2020 campaign strategy, considering it got him the most votes in US history and a miraculous upset over an incumbent whose performance grew by 20%

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Damn, this is good. Koch can replace Sullum with cheaper TDS.

[someone]

I asked it to write a Sullum style article for the 2024 election.

We can probably have it predict most of the Reason articles for the rest of 2023 and 2024.

==================================

Title: “The Return of Trump’s Authoritarian Impulses: A Warning for the 2024 Election”

As Donald Trump prepares to mount yet another presidential campaign in 2024, there are growing concerns that his authoritarian impulses are only getting worse. During his time in office, Trump repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to flout democratic norms, trample on the rule of law, and use the powers of the presidency to punish his political enemies. If he were to win another term, many fear that his autocratic tendencies could lead to a full-blown assault on our democratic institutions.

Trump’s authoritarian impulses were on full display during his term in office. He routinely attacked the free press as “fake news” and called for reporters to be jailed. He used the Justice Department to investigate and harass his political opponents, including Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. He sought to undermine the independence of the judiciary by attacking judges who ruled against him and by stacking the courts with his own loyalists. And he repeatedly abused his power to advance his personal interests, from using the presidency to promote his businesses to pressuring foreign governments to investigate his political rivals.

Since leaving office, Trump has continued to stoke fears of authoritarianism by spreading baseless conspiracy theories about election fraud and suggesting that he may be “reinstated” as president. He has also continued to pressure Republican officials to support his bogus claims of a stolen election, and he has endorsed primary challengers to GOP lawmakers who have failed to sufficiently support him.

All of these actions point to a deeply concerning trend towards authoritarianism, one that could have disastrous consequences for American democracy if left unchecked. While Trump’s supporters may argue that his authoritarian impulses are a necessary response to a “deep state” conspiracy against him, the reality is that his attacks on democratic norms and institutions only serve to undermine the very foundations of our democracy.

As we approach the 2024 election, it is imperative that we remain vigilant against the growing threat of authoritarianism. We must demand that all candidates, regardless of party, commit to upholding the rule of law, respecting the independence of the judiciary, and protecting the rights and freedoms of all Americans. And we must be prepared to hold accountable any politician who seeks to undermine our democracy for their own personal gain.

The future of our democracy depends on our ability to recognize and resist the authoritarian impulses that threaten to tear it apart. We cannot afford to let Trump’s autocratic tendencies go unchallenged, lest we risk losing the very freedoms and liberties that make America great.

[JesseAz]

Can you do this for every article reason posts? Just take the theme and ask chatGPT to write it.

[someone]

I don't read a lot of Reason articles, but I'll try to do it occasionally.

Actually, more interesting is perhaps the fact that it can remove the tendentious language and reduce a Reason article just to facts plus arguments. Take the TikTok article of yesterday:

Take the following article. Disregard the editorializing and opinion portions, and just briefly summarize any newsworthy facts it contains: [...]

The U.S. government is considering a ban on the popular social media app TikTok, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, due to concerns over Chinese government influence on the platform. Senator Rand Paul opposes the ban, arguing against giving the Biden administration more power to control social media. Critics of the proposed ban point out that the dangers of TikTok have been overstated, censorship should be left to individuals and institutions rather than the federal government, and that the U.S. government has also pressured American social media companies like Facebook and Twitter to delete content.

In a couple of sentences, what is the primary argument the author of the article is trying to make?

The primary argument the author is making is that banning TikTok would be an unwarranted and harmful overreach of government power. They emphasize that censorship should be left to individuals and institutions, and caution against setting a precedent that could be weaponized against other companies in the future.

Does the author support that argument with any concrete and specific evidence?

The author provides some evidence to support their argument, including examples of the U.S. government pressuring American social media companies like Facebook and Twitter to delete content. They also mention the RESTRICT Act, which empowers the Commerce Department to take action against foreign threats on social media, as a potential tool that could be weaponized against other companies. However, the author does not provide specific examples of analogous past overreach or constitutional conflicts.

If we could filter Reason through ChatGPT to remove the bias and empty posturing, it might be worth reading again.

[Mike Laursen]

That has none of the style of Reason, and all of the style of a 10th grade essay assignment.

[Mother's Lament]

Exactly, TeenReason style is 6th grade essay assignment level.

[NOYB2]

Oh, Mike, that's funny: as if you could tell the difference.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Obviously Mike, you haven't been reading Reason recently, and been going straight to the comments.

[Bill Falcon]

As George C Scott said as Patton.."All glory is fleeting". Even sane people who are not Trump fans know this is going to open a pandoras box. Do you honestly think Obama, Clinton, Biden, Bush and the rest have "clean" hands given how complex some of these laws are? It does accelerate national divorce doesn't it?

[Michael Ejercito]

Republican prosecuotors have a moral duty to pursue indictments.

[Fats of Fury]

LOL. Impeachment is off the table for the most corrupt president ever.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Well they don't post the listener question any more so I'm left to speculate. I'm guessing it's something like,
"Reason is the best known libertarian publication in the U.S. When do you plan to publish anything that's remotely libertarian?"
If you are one of those dozens of sad souls who actually listens to the mournful wailings of the Reason editors please feel free to correct me. And thanks in advance.

[ThanksForTheFish]

I'm really hoping tomorrow is amazing. I bought extra popcorn.

[Sevo]

Most of us here hope you fuck off and die, asshole.

[Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2]

Fox News is wholly invested in the "Clinton/Edwards did exactly the same thing" narrative with their bimbo payoffs.

Once the tax evasion charges are public what will they claim?

Fatass Donnie did more than just pay off a bimbo. We'll find out tomorrow.

[Don't look at me!]

Because all your other predictions were so accurate……

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD]

The walls are closet in! Seriously faggot, is this the best you can come up with?

You’re just a global Marxist, child molesting piece of shit.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

I seem to recall there's a crime you did that you got your fucking ass banned for here once upon a time. Let's see, what was it...

Oh yes, you got your ass banned here under your old handle, "Sarah Palin's Buttplug" for posting dark web links to hardcore child pornography. There's a reason he's #2 folks, and it's not just because he's a shit.

[Mother's Lament]

"Once the tax evasion charges are public what will they claim?"

What tax evasion, Shrikels?

[Mother's Lament]

For Buttplug tax evasion is the NY prosecutor disagreeing with federal prosecutors about which column Trump’s accountant should’ve reported the cheque under.

However, avoiding paying Medicare taxes on book income and speaking fees by routing $13.3 million through “S corporations” totally isn't.

[NOYB2]

There are no tax evasion charges. That's the problem.

The charge is falsification of business records, but that only violates the law if it is "with intent to defraud".

But Trump's falsification resulted in him paying higher taxes, meaning there was no "intent to defraud". Changing business records in a way that makes money that isn't taxable becomes taxable isn't a crime.

[Sevo]

Turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, A TDS-addled shit-pile and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.

[DesigNate]

Tax evasion like not paying your taxes for three years before becoming SecTres under Obama?

[kfs]

There you go again Palins's Tampon 1, you're incorrigible. I hope all of you Trump haters stocked up on Kleenex because it looks like there is going be a massive jerk session tomorrow,but I'm sure you got a head start.

[Mother's Lament]

Donald Trump is 66 years too old to be Pluggo's spank material, but he might paint one of the kids chained up in his basement orange to celebrate.

[Fred Mertz]

Be kinda cool if there was a podcast to go with this nifty graphic. Or is it just me?

[Mother's Lament]

Hilarious that nobody noticed until now.

[Stuck in California]

Does anyone actually LISTEN to the podcasts or round table videos? I mean, it's a magazine. I want to read an article, I am not here to watch "journalists" to sit around and yammer with each other.

They should provide transcripts if they want us to do more than just make fun of the headlines.

[JesseAz]

I'm laughing about it. Would have thought Mike would have at least noticed.

[mad.casual]

You're the author of all the weekly listener questions aren't you? *spits*

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

All of this chatter about Trump, but no one discussing which indictment is most likely to be next?

The illegal possession of documents (and the lying under oath about it)?

Jan. 6?

The Georgia election misconduct?

The business fraud (lying to lenders, insurers, etc.) case?

So many crimes, so little time (that a 76-year-old could reasonably be expected to serve in prison before replacement provides the ultimate pardon).

Carry on, clingers. More whining, empty threats, and silly bluster, please!

[Sevo]

Fuck off and die, asshole bigot.

[Sandra (formerly OBL)]

Another rousing installment of Dimestore Jeffrey Toobin's Legal Analysis!

Gotta admire someone who dusts himself off and continues acting like an expert after humiliating himself with this idiotic #Resistance fantasy he passed off as serious insight. 🙂

[Stuck in California]

Best part about that link is the folks taking Rabbi Harvey Weinstien seriously.

[Mother's Lament]

Imagine thinking there's still validity to those accusations after six years of constant investigation.

There's a reason that they're risking a civil war over a disagreement about which column his accountant should have recorded a cheque under. Because they don't have anything else.

[Stuck in California]

It was the dude's campaign promise to persecute prosecute Trump. So he's a politician living up to his promises!

The fact that running a campaign on specifically going after one man, even without proof of a specific crime when the promise was made, isn't grounds for American Revolution era tar and feathering is kind of sad, though.

[Ersatz]

the fact that such a campaign strategy won for him is even sadder

[Unicorn Abattoir]

Carry on, clingers.

So sayeth the Reason gecko.

[someone]

ChatGPT can also replace Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland. Here are some samples:
===
Happy 4th of July to all the clingers out there who can’t wait to show off their flags, guns, and bigoted views. While you’re busy celebrating your misplaced patriotism and outdated beliefs, the rest of us will be enjoying a day off from dealing with your nonsense.
===
Public education is under attack by wingnut politicians and their bigoted supporters who want to impose their narrow-minded views on our children. The only hope we have is to stand up to these rubes and fight for a fair and equitable education system that serves all students, not just the privileged few.
===
Ah, Easter. That special time of year when the clingers come out in droves to celebrate their outdated beliefs in a mythical figure rising from the dead. Don’t worry, your betters will be enjoying the holiday with friends and family while you’re busy hiding eggs and spouting nonsense about the resurrection.
===
Christmas is just another excuse for the bigoted wingnuts to push their narrow-minded views on the rest of us. While they’re busy putting up their nativity scenes and complaining about the “war on Christmas,” the rest of us will be enjoying the holiday with friends and family, free from the nonsense of the clingers.
===
Apple pie may be a national symbol, but it’s also a favorite of the bigoted, narrow-minded wingnuts who want to take us back to the “good old days” when their outdated beliefs held sway. Don’t be fooled by their nostalgic nonsense – the future belongs to those who are willing to move forward, not cling to the past.

[Sevo]

"...Christmas is just another excuse for the bigoted wingnuts to push their narrow-minded views on the rest of us. While they’re busy putting up their nativity scenes and complaining about the “war on Christmas,” the rest of us will be enjoying the holiday with friends and family, free from the nonsense of the clingers..."

That reads more like turd than the asshole bigot, but they might well be interchangeable.

[someone]

Yeah, I agree, ChatGPT is perhaps a little too coherent for "the Rev".

[Sevo]

Had not used, was not informed of what ChatGPT delivered. Now what?

[kfs]

Donnie loves you Kirky angel it's just the rest of us here that think you're an asshole.

[Sevo]

BTW, not “The Apocalypse”, but an extremely sad day in the history of this experiment. Very sad.
Never before, to my knowledge, have large parts of all three branches of the federal government been weaponized for the political purposes of punishing someone for demonstrating that the swamp critters can be replaced.
Biden, Shumer, Pelosi, the lot of them, have lived very cushy lives while producing absolutely nothing of value and collecting ‘rents’ beyond the reckoning of most all of us.
If such a threat requires a 6-year (and counting) witch-hunt, (absent any hint of the rule of law) to defend it, so be it.
Accordingly, the scum-bag, Bragg, was the recipient of major campaign donations, running on a platform of ‘tossing Trump and his family behind bars’ (note that any crimes were to be discovered later; they were simply presumed).
And if (just if) it blows up in his face, well, Biden, Shumer, Pelosi, (Soros the National Socialist), and the lot of them have baubles to throw at the feet of the next low-level sacrificial scum-bag.
There are tons more rent to be collected and therefore strong motives to keep the witch-hunt going; can’t have these parasites working for a living now, can we?
This must, somehow, end if the experiment has any chance of success.

[Sevo]

Too late for an edit:
"Soros the National Socialist"
Read that as Nazi; indeed Soros was nothing other.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Nazi, National Socialist, there's no difference, and most of us will understand it.

[DRM]

Just because the wordcels of the Reason staff are unable to understand an argument doesn't make it terrible.