Enlarge / A camera aboard Virgin Galactic's VSS Unity rocket plane captured this view from the edge of space Thursday. (credit: Virgin Galactic)

Virgin Galactic launched three Italian researchers and three company employees on the suborbital operator’s first commercial flight to the edge of space Thursday.

The six-man crew rocketed to an altitude of more than 279,000 feet, higher than the 50-mile height recognized as the boundary of space by NASA and the Federal Aviation Administration, according to Virgin Galactic, the space tourism firm founded in 2004 by Richard Branson.

The company’s large carrier jet, called VMS Eve, took off from a runway at Spaceport America in New Mexico and climbed to an altitude of about 45,000 feet, where it released the VSS Unity rocket plane at 11:28 am EDT (1528 UTC) to ignite its motor and start the climb to suborbital space.

Read 23 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Enlarge (credit: Getty Images)

The EV charging plug deathwatch might need to be kicked into a higher gear. This week two charging networks have announced that they're going to add support for the Tesla-style North American Charging Standard connectors. On Wednesday, Blink revealed that it integrated NACS into its level 2 and DC fast chargers. Today, it was Electrify America, the country's largest non-Tesla charging network, which will also add NACS plugs to its charging stations.

Tesla opened up the latest version of its charging protocols to the wider auto industry in November 2022, renaming it the North American Charging Standard as it did so. For a few months, nothing much happened, but in late May, Ford signed a deal to adopt NACS and obtain access to Tesla's Supercharger network. Two weeks later, General Motors followed, then Rivian, and most recently, Volvo joined the club.

At first, the move raised eyebrows from some industry watchers. It appeared that Ford, GM, and others were putting a hugely important aspect of their customers' EV experience into the hands of a rival—one run by a CEO known for impulsive, often rash decisions like suggesting making Tesla private again or deciding to close all its retail stores, both whims that were later backtracked.

Read 7 remaining paragraphs | Comments

ADHD is more than just a buzzword. It’s a real, brain-based condition that affects millions of kids and adults alike. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tells us that a substantial 9.4% of children have been officially diagnosed with ADHD.^[1] The reality doesn’t stop at adolescence. According to the National Institute of Mental Health, 4.4% of adults bear the weight of ADHD,^[2] many of them are slipping under the diagnostic radar, unnoted and untreated.

ADHD isn’t just about hyperactivity or impulsive behavior. It’s also about attention or, to be exact, the lack of it. This ties into a certain notorious accomplice of ADHD: procrastination. The relationship between procrastination and ADHD isn’t officially outlined in diagnostic manuals. Yet, a study from 2014 illustrates a clear link, not with impulsivity as initially presumed, but with inattention.^[3]

Procrastination, often seen as a negative trait, can actually be an adaptive response for those living with ADHD as they may use it as a coping mechanism when faced with a demanding task.

So, how to beat procrastination when ADHD is in the picture?. In this article, I’ll dig into ways to manage and even conquer procrastination despite having ADHD.

Why Do People With ADHD Struggle with Procrastination?

People with ADHD are considered to have executive dysfunction.^[4] In simpler terms, it’s when the brain’s planning, organizing, and problem-solving gears are not turning as smoothly as they should. These executive functions are vital for our day-to-day brain operations. They control our ability to focus, put in effort, remember things, manage emotions, organize tasks, and keep an eye on our actions.^[5]

This is why when given a task, people with ADHD may get stumped, unsure of how to begin or track their progress. It’s also easy for them to get distracted, leading to tasks being shoved aside, sometimes indefinitely.

Basically, it’s rooted in the intrinsic characteristics of ADHD:^[6]

People with ADHD can find it hard to zero in on a single task.

They might start off strong, but maintaining that laser-like focus can prove challenging. As soon as a fresh, more enticing task or idea pops up, it’s all too easy to abandon the initial task.

People with ADHD often act on a whim.

This makes it tough to stick with a task that requires consistent effort over time. Add to this a heightened sensitivity to distractions, and it’s clear how it’s all a setup for procrastination.

The initial push to kick off a task is often daunting for those with ADHD.

Deciding where to begin, or even just thinking about the complexity of the task, can feel like trying to climb a steep hill.

This often leads to the “last-minute propulsion” phenomenon. Sometimes, people with ADHD find that their productivity shoots up as deadlines loom. The increased pressure can help to sharpen focus, but it’s a risky strategy that can lead to unnecessary stress and subpar results.

This ties in with the sense of paralysis and feeling overwhelmed. When faced with a task, especially a complex one, people with ADHD may feel immobilized. They see a mountain of work and can’t figure out how to navigate it, leading to inertia and procrastination.

The impaired sense of time.

People with ADHD might underestimate the time needed to complete tasks or overestimate their ability to finish tasks quickly. This skewed perception can result in tasks getting pushed to the back burner, only to be tackled in a hurried rush when time runs out.

Is ADHD Paralysis the Same as Procrastination?

There’s another phenomenon that’s often mixed up with procrastination – ADHD paralysis. The two might seem similar, but they’re not quite the same.

ADHD paralysis comes with its own unique set of symptoms^[7]:

• Brain fog, where focus and mental clarity seem to evaporate.
• Exhaustion
• Social isolation
• Time blindness – where you lose track of time
• Easily distracted
• Emotional lability,^[8] where emotions swing wildly.
• Difficulty in decision-making

These symptoms might sound like procrastination, and yes, there are overlaps. But here’s the crucial difference:

Procrastination is something we all do. It’s when we choose to delay tasks because we’re tired or simply not in the mood.

ADHD paralysis, on the other hand, is not about making a choice. It’s an involuntary response to being overwhelmed by information, tasks, or instructions. It’s like your brain is a computer that has too many programs running at once and crashes. This isn’t a case of not wanting to do something; it’s about not being able to.

While both procrastination and ADHD paralysis can lead to tasks being put off, they’re driven by different forces. One is a choice, often influenced by motivation or energy levels. The other is an involuntary response linked to cognitive overload and executive dysfunction.

Coping Mechanisms for ADHD Procrastination

ADHD might have a knack for roping you into procrastination or even paralysis. But here’s the kicker – you’re not stuck.

You can learn strategies, tools, and tricks to keep your momentum, get stuff done, and reduce the hold that ADHD can have on your productivity.

1. Break Down Overwhelming Tasks into Smaller Ones

Firstly, think of a task as a puzzle. Instead of trying to put it together all at once, break it down into smaller, manageable pieces. This way, each piece becomes a mini-task of its own, making the whole job feel less daunting and more achievable.

I’ve taught about the techniques on breaking down tasks in How to Break Down a Large Project into Manageable Tasks

2. Try Time Blocking

Time blocking is about setting specific times for specific tasks. Like scheduling your day so that 10-11 am is for answering emails, and 2-3 pm is for working on a project. This approach can help you focus on one thing at a time and prevent you from getting overwhelmed.

Learn more about how to use time blocking: How to Use Time Blocking for Productivity

3. Remove Yourself From Distractions

Distractions are a procrastinator’s best buddies. So, do your best to limit them.

Mute your phone notifications, find a quiet place to work, or use apps that block distracting websites. Create an environment that allows you to concentrate on the task at hand.

Here’re 11 Quick Tips on How Not to Get Distracted.

4. Engage in Activities That Energize You

We all have activities that energize us. Maybe it’s a walk in the park, a quick workout, or jamming to your favorite tunes. When you feel your energy levels dropping, take a break to recharge.

It’s not about being lazy; it’s about maintaining your energy level and productivity in the long run.

5. Build Your Own Reward System

Finished a task? Treat yourself. It doesn’t have to be anything big. Maybe it’s a cup of your favorite coffee or an episode of a TV show you love. The point is to reinforce positive behavior and keep you motivated to move forward.

Read more on How to Hack the Reward System in Your Brain And Stay Motivated

6. Practice Mindfulness and Self-Awareness

Practice being present, recognizing your feelings, and understanding your triggers. This can help you catch yourself before you slip into a procrastination spiral.

I personally find practicing mindfulness useful in helping me regain focus. Doing a 15-minute breathing exercise can already help to calm my mind and recharge my mental energy.

I encourage you to try this too: 3 Deep Breathing Exercises to Relax and Reduce Stress

7. Seek Professional Help

Therapists, coaches, and doctors can provide you with personalized strategies and coping mechanisms to navigate ADHD and procrastination. It’s all about finding what works best for you. There’s no shame for seeking professional help.

Here’s a list of ADHD organizations that can provide assistance.

Final Thoughts

To everyone wrestling with ADHD and procrastination:

You are more than your struggles.

You have the strength and capability to navigate this. Sure, it might be tough at times, but every step forward, no matter how small, is a victory.

Take the time to understand your unique patterns and triggers, equip yourself with strategies that work for you, and show yourself compassion along the way. ADHD and procrastination may be a part of your story, but they don’t define you.

TL;DR

Don't have time for the full article? Read this.

❯

ADHD, a neurodevelopmental disorder, often leads to symptoms such as inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity, which can contribute to procrastination.

❯

Procrastination is a common struggle for individuals with ADHD due to challenges with focus, impulsivity, difficulty getting started, and problems with time management, among others.

❯

ADHD paralysis, a state of being unable to start or complete tasks due to feeling overwhelmed, is distinct from procrastination. It’s an involuntary response to cognitive overload and dysfunction, often resulting from impaired executive functioning.

❯

Both ADHD procrastination and paralysis can be managed through various coping mechanisms such as: 1) Breaking down tasks into manageable ones 2) Time blocking or scheduling tasks 3) Limiting distractions 4) Engaging in activities that energizeImplementing a reward system 5) Practicing mindfulness and self-awareness 6) Seeking professional help

The post How to Snap Out of Procrastination With ADHD appeared first on Lifehack.

Several large sections of the submersible were hauled ashore from the recovery ship after it docked in Canada.

Multimillion dollar solar project gets reduced to a heap of toxic rubble by one single hail storm. 

The Scottsbluff, Nebraska 5.2 MW Community Solar project was part of the NPPD’s Sunwise program that consisted of an array has over 14,000 solar panels. It’s reported that it had been put into operation in 2019. 

Surely the project had been ceremoniously put into operation, with dignitaries and proponents proclaiming it would reliably deliver cheap and clean energy, reduce the state’s carbon footprint and contribute to a bright and climate-friendly future.

Now it has been just recently reported that the multimillion dollar solar energy park was literally reduced to a heap of rubble as hail literally pummeled it to a pulp in just a matter of minutes days ago.

https://twitter.com/WxWyDaryl/status/1673830414329454592

The disaster underscores once again just how vulnerable to the forces of nature solar energy parks are. The system’s 25-year expected lifetime was cut to down to less than 4 years, and makes you wonder if setting up such weather-vulnerable plants make any sense at all.

Dreams vs reality

“This project will help the city achieve its goal to reduce our carbon footprint and stabilize city costs for the next 25 years,” said Nathan D. Johnson, City Manager, City of Scottsbluff.  “Through projects like this, we hope to offer an affordable ‘green’ option to our residents, both residential and commercial, to reap the benefits as well.”

That was the dream. A couple of days ago we witnessed the reality.

Now residents will surely have to rely on good old, reliable fossil fuel power to keep the electricity flowing.

And how long will it take to clean up the toxic mess left behind?

Donate - choose an amount
5101520501002505001000

Hunter Biden has settled in court with the woman he impregnated over 4 years ago when she was working as a stripper in Arkansas, on the condition that their daughter, Navy, can't use the Biden name.

OOPS: NASA kills its electric plane’s flight plan, citing safety concerns: The decision not to fly the experimental X-57 came about because the agency discovered that the propulsion system had the potential to fail and put people at risk.

MARK JUDGE: Please Don’t Banish Jesus from Alcoholics Anonymous.

It has taken me a while to admit this, mostly because I am so reluctant to criticize a fellowship that saved my life when I stopped drinking over three decades ago. But the elimination of the “Our Father” does in fact bother me. Not only because I believe Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, but because Christianity played a crucial role in the formation of AA. Had Judaism or Islam played such a foundational role in the Twelve Steps I would also want that tradition honored. The truth is, however, that Alcoholics Anonymous was founded, and was effective, because of Christians.

AA has its origins in the evangelical Christian Oxford Group. In fact, AA co-founder Bill Wilson credits the Oxford Group for the methodology of AA: “their large emphasis upon the principles of self-survey, confession, restitution, and the giving of oneself in service to others.” Even before the Oxford Group was the Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung. Wilson wrote to Jung in 1961 to express his “great appreciation” for his efforts. “A certain conversation you once had with one of your patients, a Mr. Rowland H. back in the early 1930’s,” Wilson wrote, “did play a critical role in the founding of our Fellowship.”

Read the whole thing.

Those dang Prussians.

Enlarge / Ferrari last won Le Mans overall in 1965 and hasn't competed at the top level since 1973. This year it returned and won with the hybrid 499P hypercar. (credit: Ferrari)

On Tuesday morning, a triumphant Ferrari celebrated its latest race win. Not this past weekend's F1 race in Montreal, though; 2023 is still looking rough for Scuderia Ferrari's open-wheel racing program. Instead, the glory was brought back to Maranello by its new endurance racing effort, which just won the 24 Hours of Le Mans after an absence of 50 years. It did it with an all-new car, against tough opposition, and the enormity of that result has taken a little time to sink in, according to Ferdinando Cannizzo, technical director of Ferrari Competitzione GT and technical director for the Ferrari 499P program.

"What I can tell you is that it is clear for us that the challenge that we accepted was very ambitious, that we finally achieved a very historical result," Cannizzo told Ars. "We are aware that the company achieved an historic results, and I think everything will mature in the days that will come; we can probably realize the value of what we have done all together."

Endurance racing is flat-out now

The nature of the Le Mans race has changed a lot since Ferrari last won overall in 1965. Then, as now, overall victory was usually up for grabs for one of the cars in the prototype class—cars designed just to go racing rather than the converted road cars that contest the GT class. And the race still takes place for 24 hours on a circuit that still includes some public roads. But in the 1960s, endurance racing was not a flat-out sport; cars were fragile, and making it to the end meant leaving plenty in reserve and being kind to the machinery.

Read 14 remaining paragraphs | Comments

This past week the judge in the case, Flynn v. US, ordered that the venue will NOT change to DC, and the case will remain in Florida.

First, the judge gets into legal standard. The power to transfer a case to a different jurisdiction lies squarely in the hands of the judge overseeing the case. A venue can be moved to avoid inconvenience to the litigants, witnesses, and public and to conserve time, energy, and money.

The court needs to consider two factors when determining whether to transfer a case.

1. The court must find that the alternative venue is one where Plaintiff could have originally brought the action.

2. The court must determine whether the transfer serves the interest of justice and significantly impacts the balance of the parties.

A Plaintiff’s choice of venue generally shouldn’t be disturbed unless the Defendant can show that it is *clearly* outweighed by other considerations.

We get the judge’s decision relatively early in discussion. When I wrote about this previously, We went through all of the criteria that needed to be satisfied to change venue. I wrote about both the government’s argument, as well as Flynn’s argument on these 9 points. I correctly predicted venue would be maintained.

The government argued that 10 of 11 witnesses that were alluded to in the complaint are under the subpoena power of the court in DC, that the claims occurred there, and that DC law applies to the Plaintiff’s claims. The government also contends that Flynn should get less of a say on forum because he moved to Florida AFTER the bulk of the accusations he made occurred.

The court doesn’t think the government did a good enough job arguing those points.

Here is why the court doesn’t think the government did a good enough job:

They didn’t provide enough information about the non-party witnesses they allude to; therefore, the court can’t determine what purposes they would serve in litigation and whether they may voluntarily appear WITHOUT a subpoena.

The government basically gave away its tactics here—obviously, they will decline to testify. But courts don’t operate that way—the court can’t just assume that witnesses will refuse to appear to testify in a case. The judge couldn’t base a decision on a hypothetical (even if it is obvious to those of us who follow the government and the people involved in this case.)

Additionally, the case is not being heard by a jury but will be heard at a bench trial. It isn’t as important that witnesses appear in person and can testify virtually—removing that obstacle. Judges don’t need to see witnesses in person in the same way a jury would need to form their opinions.

Here is something I pointed out that would come to bite the government in the behind—the argument that the judge in Florida would be unable to apply law from DC in the court in FL. IMO, it was a smack in the face. Taking from Flynn’s argument in their reply brief, the judge points out here that modern tech removes the document convenience argument and slaps the government, stating that they are fully competent to apply DC law in FL federal court.

They also reaffirm that the government has offices in EVERY jurisdiction, and the only person who would be inconvenienced would be General Flynn, who would be forced to litigate outside of his home district.

Plaintiff is awarded deference to choose venue. The government didn’t argue well enough to meet the burden for change of venue. The interest of justice weighs against moving the case to DC.

The venue remains the same.

The judge wrote a strong order here, but I wish she would have addressed the bias of the DC judge and circuit, which was very well-detailed.

It isn’t typical for a judge to discuss things like that in an order and “go after” their fellow judges—however, it would have been nice to see.

Perhaps she would have if the rest of the arguments weren’t so compelling as well—she didn’t need to fall back on that one because there were other factors she could capitalize on to order in General Flynn’s favor.

The post It’s Official: Flynn Case Against Govt to Stay in FL appeared first on UncoverDC.

James O’Keefe and O’Keefe Media Group on Tuesday dropped their biggest story yet.

OMG released footage of a BlackRock recruiter Serge Varlay spilling the beans on the company’s world impact.

BlackRock is one of the largest (manages $20 trillion) and most powerful (and dangerous) asset and investment managers in the world.

Serge Varlay said BlackRock doesn’t want to be in the news and they don’t want people talking about them.

“It’s not who the president is- it’s who’s controlling the wallet of the president,” BlackRock recruiter Serge Varlay told an undercover journalist.

Serge Varlay said all the financial institutions – hedge funds, BlackRock, the banks – buy politicians – and US Senators are the cheapest.

“These guys run the world,” Varlay said.

“Campaign financing. Yup, you can buy your candidates. Obviously we have a system in place. First, there’s the senators. These guys are f*cking cheap,” he said.

“You got $10 grand? You can buy a senator,” he added.

“War is real f*cking good for business,” Varlay said as he elaborated how Ukraine is good for business.

WATCH:

BREAKING: @BlackRock Recruiter Who “Decides People’s Fate” Spills Info on Company’s World Impact

“It’s not who the president is- it’s who’s controlling the wallet of the president”

“You got $10K? You can buy a senator”

“War is real f***ing good for business” #BlackRockExposed pic.twitter.com/DZIy1DuZKF

— James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) June 20, 2023

The post O’Keefe Drops Biggest Story Yet: BlackRock Recruiter Spills Info on Company’s World Impact – “You Got $10K? You Can Buy a Senator” (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

RFK Jr. campaign tests limits of speech and censorship in 2024 elections

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s presence on social media and in the presidential race is set to challenge platforms' policies regarding speech and elevate the topic of censorship due to his vaccine skepticism and conspiracy theorizing.

His candidacy has already created a number of difficult situations for media outlets and tech platforms that feel pressure not to air his more controversial statements but also do not want to censor a politician.

GLAAD CEO SAYS TWITTER IS NOW 'A WEAPON AGAINST LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY'

"The tech companies are being more careful with their censorship now that Mr. Kennedy is running for office," a representative for Kennedy's campaign told the Washington Examiner. "However, he is still being censored by YouTube and perhaps more subtly on other platforms, though it is hard to tell since their algorithms are not transparent."

The representative specifically noted YouTube taking down an interview between psychologist Jordan Peterson and Kennedy. Google, which owns YouTube, said the interview had been removed for violated its rules against alleging that vaccines cause chronic side effects beyond those acknowledged by health authorities. Other interviews with Kennedy are still available on the video hosting platform.

Kennedy has long faced censorship on multiple platforms because of his commentary on vaccines. But his new candidacy has made it more complicated for social media to ban him or remove his content.

Most notably, Kennedy had been banned from Instagram in 2021 for spreading vaccine misinformation. But when he declared his candidacy in May, his account was reinstated in May, because Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, maintains a policy of not fact-checking political candidates and allowing candidates an equal platform. This policy became relevant earlier this year when former President Donald Trump was reinstated to Facebook after being banned for inciting violence at the Jan. 6 riots.

At the same time, Kennedy has found a welcome on Twitter, now owned by Elon Musk, who has sought to portray himself as a defender of free speech. The billionaire hosted a Twitter Space on June 5 with Kennedy.

Still, Kennedy has faced censorship as a candidate, especially for his views on vaccines.

ABC News, for example, took the unusual step of cutting out several segments of an interview with Kennedy in which he discussed his views on vaccines, citing "editorial judgment."

Controversy over Kennedy's commentary on vaccines exploded over the weekend after he appeared on the podcast of Joe Rogan, the popular interviewer who frequently criticizes the public health establishment. Amid the debate, Dr. Peter Hotez, a vaccine scientist, was pressured by Rogan to debate Kennedy on his podcast. Hotez declined, arguing that his appearance alongside Kennedy would legitimize his views.

“Anti-vaccine disinformation ... is now a lethal force in the United States. I offered to go on Joe Rogan but not to turn it into the Jerry Springer show with having RFK Jr. on," Hotez told MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan.

As Kennedy has clashed with social media and the news media, he has found an embrace among some conservatives who also have long complained about censorship and bias.

"Never before has a Kennedy been treated with such disrespect by media outlets, including when Ted Kennedy challenged Jimmy Carter in the 1980 primary," Dan Schneider, the vice president of the Media Research Center's Free Speech America, told the Washington Examiner. "Today's liberal-dominated platforms are working overtime to help Joe Biden secure a second term."

The media's representation of Kennedy is "superficial and lazy, resorting to easy slanders like 'conspiracy theorist,'" Kennedy's representative said.

Kennedy has consistently promoted anti-vaccine arguments through his organization Children's Health Defense, which publishes articles and newsletters against vaccination and was accused by researchers at the Observatory on Social Media at Indiana University of being the most prominent source of vaccine misinformation.

"Having a presidential candidate that's basically anti-vaccination and that's putting out potential misinformation could do a lot of damage," Dr. Davidson Hamer, a professor of global health at Boston University, told the Washington Examiner. "And not just to programs like COVID control but to routine childhood and adult immunizations."

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Hamer said Kennedy's claims need to be "handled cautiously" and that social media and news outlets need to provide context to Kennedy's claims while covering him.

Kennedy, in contrast, said his knowledge gives him an edge over those covering him. "It's almost impossible for anyone to interview me on vaccines," he claimed in an interview with CNN host Michael Smerconish, noting that he has spent many years writing and researching the subject compared to the reporters who may cover him.

Wait for it...

Joe and Apollo first welcome Jeff O'Donnell to the show to initiate the discussion. Then Tore joins in and delves into the Halderman Report, election fraud at the county level, vote manipulation after the fact, malicious software installs, and the urgent need to clean up the process. The factual basis exists to support the fraud conclusion. Let's not forget the Florida campaign fund finances and illegal pac moves. Who's the owner? Corruption exists at all levels and not just the ballot box. Here's an update on the affidavits still active. Some insider details on the 2014 Ukraine election. What's a quid-pro-Joe? Unbalanced describes the DOD wallet. It's all a perfect storm for a RICO take down. It's good times when two investigators reach the same conclusion. All the different views come together in this discussion, and the truth predominates. Run time is 1 hour and 36 minutes.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

WHAT HAPPENED THREE YEARS AGO THAT DROVE PEOPLE TO NEED AN ESCAPE? ‘Magic’ mushroom use by young adults has nearly doubled in three years.

"Gender is a spectrum" is so 2022. In the #CurrentYear, we're going THREE DIMENSIONAL.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Why Donald Trump Can’t Get a Top-Tier Lawyer. “There is a nefarious group that calls itself The 65 Project that has as its goal to intimidate lawyers into not representing Trump or anyone associated with him. They have threatened to file bar charges against any such lawyers. When these threats first emerged, I wrote an op-ed offering to defend pro bono any lawyers that The 65 Project goes after. So The 65 Project immediately went after me, and contrived a charge based on a case in which I was a constitutional consultant, but designed to send a message to potential Trump lawyers: if you defend Trump or anyone associated with him, we will target you and find something to charge you with. The lawyers to whom I spoke are fully aware of this threat — and they are taking it seriously.”

Sounds like a conspiracy to deprive people of their civil rights.

Artificial intelligence will bring great benefits to all of humanity. But do we really want to entrust this revolutionary technology solely to a small group of US tech companies?

Silicon Valley has produced no small number of moral disappointments. Google retired its “don’t be evil” pledge before firing its star ethicist. Self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist” Elon Musk bought Twitter in order to censor political speech, retaliate against journalists, and ease access to the platform for Russian and Chinese propagandists. Facebook lied about how it enabled Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election and paid a public relations firm to blame Google and George Soros instead.

These and countless other ethical lapses should prompt us to consider whether we want to give technology companies further abilities to learn our personal details and influence our day-to-day decisions. Tech companies can already access our daily whereabouts and search queries. Digital devices monitor more and more aspects of our lives: We have cameras in our homes and heartbeat sensors on our wrists sending what they detect to Silicon Valley.

Now, tech giants are developing ever more powerful AI systems that don’t merely monitor you; they actually interact with you—and with others on your behalf. If searching on Google in the 2010s was like being watched on a security camera, then using AI in the late 2020s will be like having a butler. You will willingly include them in every conversation you have, everything you write, every item you shop for, every want, every fear, everything. It will never forget. And, despite your reliance on it, it will be surreptitiously working to further the interests of one of these for-profit corporations.

There’s a reason Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and other large tech companies are leading the AI revolution: Building a competitive large language model (LLM) like the one powering ChatGPT is incredibly expensive. It requires upward of $100 million in computational costs for a single model training run, in addition to access to large amounts of data. It also requires technical expertise, which, while increasingly open and available, remains heavily concentrated in a small handful of companies. Efforts to disrupt the AI oligopoly by funding start-ups are self-defeating as Big Tech profits from the cloud computing services and AI models powering those start-ups—and often ends up acquiring the start-ups themselves.

Yet corporations aren’t the only entities large enough to absorb the cost of large-scale model training. Governments can do it, too. It’s time to start taking AI development out of the exclusive hands of private companies and bringing it into the public sector. The United States needs a government-funded-and-directed AI program to develop widely reusable models in the public interest, guided by technical expertise housed in federal agencies.

So far, the AI regulation debate in Washington has focused on the governance of private-sector activity—which the US Congress is in no hurry to advance. Congress should not only hurry up and push AI regulation forward but also go one step further and develop its own programs for AI. Legislators should reframe the AI debate from one about public regulation to one about public development.

The AI development program could be responsive to public input and subject to political oversight. It could be directed to respond to critical issues such as privacy protection, underpaid tech workers, AI’s horrendous carbon emissions, and the exploitation of unlicensed data. Compared to keeping AI in the hands of morally dubious tech companies, the public alternative is better both ethically and economically. And the switch should take place soon: By the time AI becomes critical infrastructure, essential to large swaths of economic activity and daily life, it will be too late to get started.

Other countries are already there. China has heavily prioritized public investment in AI research and development by betting on a handpicked set of giant companies that are ostensibly private but widely understood to be an extension of the state. The government has tasked Alibaba, Huawei, and others with creating products that support the larger ecosystem of state surveillance and authoritarianism.

The European Union is also aggressively pushing AI development. The European Commission already invests 1 billion euros per year in AI, with a plan to increase that figure to 20 billion euros annually by 2030. The money goes to a continent-wide network of public research labs, universities, and private companies jointly working on various parts of AI. The Europeans’ focus is on knowledge transfer, developing the technology sector, use of AI in public administration, mitigating safety risks, and preserving fundamental rights. The EU also continues to be at the cutting edge of aggressively regulating both data and AI.

Neither the Chinese nor the European model is necessarily right for the United States. State control of private enterprise remains anathema in American political culture and would struggle to gain mainstream traction. The tech companies—and their supporters in both US political parties—are opposed to robust public governance of AI. But Washington can take inspiration from China and Europe’;s long-range planning and leadership on regulation and public investment. With boosters pointing to hundreds of trillions of dollars of global economic value associated with AI, the stakes of international competition are compelling. As in energy and medical research, which have their own federal agencies in the Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health, respectively, there is a place for AI research and development inside government.

Beside the moral argument against letting private companies develop AI, there’s a strong economic argument in favor of a public option as well. A publicly funded LLM could serve as an open platform for innovation, helping any small business, nonprofit, or individual entrepreneur to build AI-assisted applications.

There’s also a practical argument. Building AI is within public reach because governments don’t need to own and operate the entire AI supply chain. Chip and computer production, cloud data centers, and various value-added applications—such as those that integrate AI with consumer electronics devices or entertainment software—do not need to be publicly controlled or funded.

One reason to be skeptical of public funding for AI is that it might result in a lower quality and slower innovation, given greater ethical scrutiny, political constraints, and fewer incentives due to a lack of market competition. But even if that is the case, it would be worth broader access to the most important technology of the 21st century. And it is by no means certain that public AI has to be at a disadvantage. The open-source community is proof that it’s not always private companies that are the most innovative.

Those who worry about the quality trade-off might suggest a public buyer model, whereby Washington licenses or buys private language models from Big Tech instead of developing them itself. But that doesn’t go far enough to ensure that the tools are aligned with public priorities and responsive to public needs. It would not give the public detailed insight into or control of the inner workings and training procedures for these models, and it would still require strict and complex regulation.

There is political will to take action to develop AI via public, rather than private, funds—but this does not yet equate to the will to create a fully public AI development agency. A task force created by Congress recommended in January a $2.6 billion federal investment in computing and data resources to prime the AI research ecosystem in the United States. But this investment would largely serve to advance the interests of Big Tech, leaving the opportunity for public ownership and oversight unaddressed.

Nonprofit and academic organizations have already created open-access LLMs. While these should be celebrated, they are not a substitute for a public option. Nonprofit projects are still beholden to private interests, even if they are benevolent ones. These private interests can change without public input, as when OpenAI effectively abandoned its nonprofit origins, and we can’t be sure that their founding intentions or operations will survive market pressures, fickle donors, and changes in leadership.

The US government is by no means a perfect beacon of transparency, a secure and responsible store of our data, or a genuine reflection of the public’s interests. But the risks of placing AI development entirely in the hands of demonstrably untrustworthy Silicon Valley companies are too high. AI will impact the public like few other technologies, so it should also be developed by the public.

This essay was written with Nathan Sanders, and appeared in Foreign Policy.

Enlarge / A Hubble image of a pair of colliding galaxies, with a satellite trail running through it. (credit: Space Telescope Science Institute; NASA)

Throngs of satellites are streaking across the Hubble Space Telescope’s field of view, leaving what look like scratch marks on space photos and hindering scientists’ work. Teeming swarms of these satellites, which reflect sunlight and mimic astronomical objects, threaten to gradually transform the night sky and affect how astronomy can be done.

“We see these satellite trails in Hubble data, and really in all astronomical data, and they’re a bit of a nuisance,” said David Stark, an astronomer at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, speaking last week at the American Astronomical Society conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico. In fact, he said, his team used a new detection method to measure that the rate of satellite trails is doubling. But Stark was presenting his team’s idea for a Band-Aid fix: new software they described in a recent report that is five to 10 times more sensitive at finding trails than previous software, and then masking them out. “It’s particularly good at finding satellite trails that can be missed by eye,” he said.

Read 12 remaining paragraphs | Comments

This is simply outstanding. Look how triggered these woke parents and faculty are.