Pun Salad

The Eye Candy Du Jour … looks like she knows something, doesn't it?

The WSJ has a scoop: a Classified Whistleblower Complaint About Tulsi Gabbard Stalls Within Her Agency. (WSJ gifted link)

I assume Joseph Heller is, somewhere in the afterlife, murmuring "Catch-22", perhaps with a wry grin.

I also assume Mick Herron will write a Slow Horses novel incorporating a similar plot thread someday, if he hasn't done so already.

Also of note:

• 

  Looks like it's up to you, Sweet Meteor of Death. I suppose many will see this as good news: Superintelligent AI Is Not Coming To Kill You. It is a Neil Chilson's brief review/debunking of the book Amazon-linked at your right.

  "We do not mean that as hyperbole," they write. They believe artificial intelligence research will inevitably produce superintelligent machines and these machines will inevitably kill everyone.

  This is an extraordinary claim. It requires extraordinary evidence. Instead, they offer a daisy chain of thought experiments, unexamined premises, and a linguistic sleight of hand that smuggles their conclusion into the definition of intelligence itself.

  The book's central argument rests on the "alignment problem"—the effort to ensure that advanced AI systems share human values. Yudkowsky popularized this concept. Humans, the authors argue, succeed through intelligence, which they define as "the work of predicting the world, and the work of steering the world." Computers will surpass human intelligence because they are faster, can copy themselves, have perfect memory, and can modify their own architecture. Because AI systems are "grown" through training rather than explicitly programmed, we cannot fully specify their goals. When superintelligent AI pursues objectives that diverge even slightly from human values, it will optimize relentlessly toward those alien goals. When we interfere, it will eliminate us.

  Well, I put it on my get-at-library list anyway, for when I'm in the mood for something apocalyptic.

• Speaking of apocalyptic no-shows: Commie broadcasting survives. I don't know if Becket Adams' story is good news or bad, but: NPR and PBS Never Needed Your Taxpayer Dollars. (NR gifted link)

  When Republican lawmakers moved last year to end taxpayer funding for PBS and NPR, a constellation of media CEOs and experts warned that the cuts would result in the closure of dozens, possibly hundreds, of affiliate stations.

  It has now been six months since President Trump signed a bill eliminating $1.1 billion in federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and the predicted newsroom Armageddon has yet to materialize.

  In fact, of the more than 1,000 television and radio stations that make up the country’s public media system, nearly all remain operational.

  Becket gets in a wisecrack: "I distinctly remember being told that the budget cuts would kill us all. No, wait. Sorry. That was net neutrality." Before rattling off some of the dire predictions made by adherents.

  I suppose it's an interesting question: Now that NPR/PBS rely more on voluntary donations, has that made them more lefty, or less? Interesting question, but not interesting enough to make me Google.

• LFOD, unless prohibited by shaky legal rulings. Jonathan H. Adler is nonplussed by the success a recent legal shenanigan: Private Suit Commandeers New Hampshire Government to Maintain Vehicle Emission Inspections.

  This weekend car owners in New Hampshire were supposed to be done with regular automobile emission inspections. Although such inspections had been part of the New Hampshire's State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the federal Clean Air Act, the state legislature passed a law abolishing the program last year, effective today, January 31. Now, however, the inspections may be required after all.

  Gordon-Darby Holdings, which owns the company that administered the program under a contract with the state did not want the program (and its associated revenue) to go away, so it filed suit, seeking an injunction to force New Hampshire to continue requiring automobile emission inspections. According to Gordon-Darby, New Hampshire was required to maintain the program unless and until it received approval from the federal Environmental Protection Agency. On this basis, the company went to court and—quite shockingly—prevailed.

  Jonathan thinks the ruling made by federal district court judge Landya McCafferty is clearly flawed on "anti-commandeering" grounds. (Something "typically taught to first-year law students in the introductory Constitutional Law course.") So we'll see what happens. My inspection month was (and maybe still is) April, so they have a few months to figure it out.