The program was 'Racter', short for 'raconteur' (story teller) but the system allowed only 6 characters for file names, and dates from 1984.
The difference to His Orangeness would be huge since the program at least made no errors in grammar or spelling. And at least the texts published by Chamberlain were far more entertaining than the utterings (in text and speech) of Jabbabonk the Orange. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racter
The old Eliza chatbot was generally harmless.
Wasn't there another, called something like 'Racktor', that simulated a paranoid schizophrenic?
Seems like Trump could be replaced with that one, with little observable difference.
It's amazing that the expenditures on AI may be propping up the economy in the face of Trump's policies on trade and the cratering of tourism to the US.
It somewhat depends on where you are. I've been seeing stories of people using local electric grids being overwhelmed because someone set up an AI (LLM) data center in the area. They are incredible users of electricity. Can be a real issue if your power goes out as a result of the extra load.
Bubble or not, the current LLMs and other types of "AI" will have a massive impact even if development hits a wall.
I'm currently using Grok for most things because it seems to have more horsepower behind it than the free versions of other LLMs.
The wordsmiths among you may find much to criticize, but this review of the TV drama series, Veronica Mars, by Grok seems very good to me. Veronica Mars: Noir, Trauma, and Justice
using the term AI for LLM was marketing genius
The phenomenon is much more widespread than just slapping the "AI" label on LLMs. Almost anything newsworthy that's done by a computer these days is hyped as "AI."
See, for example, this article about Delta's pricing. Someone more knowledgeable than I (which is probably almost everyone here) can correct me if I'm wrong, but Delta's personalized pricing seems to require a big database of personal data that shouldn't be public in the first place (a whole topic in its own right) and an algorithm for analyzing it. In other words, a bog standard computer program.
Another example: a friend of mine recently checked out the conversational capabilities at one of the well known language teaching sites. (I don't know which one.) He labeled the conversation as "AI"-generated, which may in fact be accurate, but it reminded me of Eliza, which was written ~60 years ago. And then there's this, about which I got nothin'.
The mention of travel agents and bookstores is a good reminder to skeptical me that "AI" is going to have widespread disruptive effects even if it isn't remotely what it's hyped to be.
Dubya's regime was malign and incompetent; Bolton was especially malign. But fighting fascism is the priority now.
Thanks to bobbyp for his link on this.
IMO John Bolton is appalling in very many ways, and his warmongering often appeared (and was, again IMO) verging on madness.
But Ubu appointed him as one of "the best people" in his first administration, and once he started openly dissing and criticising Ubu and U was POTUS again, and in a position to do something about it, he sicced the FBI on him.
The principle is the thing that matters. This is the sort of thing that does not happen in functioning democracies which respect the rule of law.
That is equivalent to supporting former RAF members to overthrow the German government (ok, the German government isn't as bad as the Iranian but the MEK/RAF comparison is apt).
Besides being a general warmonger, he was a primary cheerleader for the Iraq War. About a year before the US entered Iraq, he wanted to go to war with Cuba for WMDs they didn't have. He stood for about everything bad in Bush's foreign policy.
It's hard to have much sympathy for John Bolton. After his role in the Bush administration...
Charles, you've piqued my curiosity. What things did Bolton do under Bush that you disapprove of? I've got my own list, but just wondering what he's done that you disagree with.
It's hard to have much sympathy for John Bolton. After his role in the Bush administration, he should have been pushed into obscurity and never heard from again.
To me, what is more interesting is Charles' 'who is this Vance person of which you speak' and at the same time eagerly searching for Youtube videos of UK citizens complaining about Muslims taking over the country. Call it the Texas two-step...
That is the upside (such as it is) of Vance replacing Trump at some point. While he would eventually install more competent people in service to a vile agenda, he doesn't have the leverage of being able to threaten Republican politicians with the supporters of the god-king. So he will face serious resistance from those with something resembling principles but no courage.
I suspect that the MAGA true believers will reflexively turn to the approach of the religion they were (mostly) raised in. Turn away from politics and await the second coming of their messiah. The Church of Trump** may get organized as a proper religion by a new leader. But he won't be worshipped. And he won't be Vance.
** Will the Church of Trump replace the Latter Day Saints as America's most successful cult? Hard to say at this point. I'm not seeing a Brigham Young type figure, but there might be one out there.
Vance exists to elevate himself and to service the billionaires that have enabled his political career in the hopes of getting their political desires fulfilled. Vance would be less distractible and more motivated in his pursuit of a Project 2025 agenda, cutting deals with the Techno-Oligarch wannabes to make sure that they were rich enough and isolated enough from government interference to not be affected by the restrictions brought in the name of Christian Nationalism.
On the bright side, Vance is a negative-charisma asshat with none of Trump's instincts for the grift. I don't think he'd get the same sort of laughing support that Cheetolini gets, and Newsom would mock him incessantly.
He knows what he's saying is false and just says it anyway.
I think this is true. And I think he does it in service of his ambition - he knows that the most likely way for him to be the next POTUS is to slavishly toady to Ubu, and tell whatever lies are necessary to further his aim. It's possible that he thinks that once he is POTUS he will be able to get out from under any Ubu stuff he disagreed with (whatever that may be), but in my opinion he would be an even worse and more dangerous POTUS if that is possible. And my life experience tells me that no matter how bad it is, it can always get worse. The fact that the US has elected Ubu twice gives me no faith that it couldn't happen again, and next time with even more capable, competent and efficient apparatchiks.
He can't be wrong about everything all the time... :)
Yes, based on his public utterances, he is demonstrably able to do so.
I don't think Vance is wrong in the sense of being mistaken or misinformed. He's an intelligent person, he understands the reality, and he understands what he is saying.
He's lying. Bullshitting, gaslighting, whatever you want to call it. He speaks intentional falsehoods to obscure the truth and mislead people.
He's a liar.
Trump is also, but I think Trump half-believes his own bullshit. By "half believes" I mean I think his thought process is something like "I want this to be true, so I'm going to act like it is true".
Vance seems, to me, profoundly more cynical than that. He knows what he's saying is false and just says it anyway.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “I’m forever blowing bubbles”
Seems like Trump could be replaced with that one, with little observable difference.
Or a monkey that flings tariffs instead of shit.
"
The program was 'Racter', short for 'raconteur' (story teller) but the system allowed only 6 characters for file names, and dates from 1984.
The difference to His Orangeness would be huge since the program at least made no errors in grammar or spelling. And at least the texts published by Chamberlain were far more entertaining than the utterings (in text and speech) of Jabbabonk the Orange.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racter
"
I'm skipping Replika, talk to me when the holosuites are available.
LOL
"
The old Eliza chatbot was generally harmless.
Wasn't there another, called something like 'Racktor', that simulated a paranoid schizophrenic?
Seems like Trump could be replaced with that one, with little observable difference.
"
It's amazing that the expenditures on AI may be propping up the economy in the face of Trump's policies on trade and the cratering of tourism to the US.
It somewhat depends on where you are. I've been seeing stories of people using local electric grids being overwhelmed because someone set up an AI (LLM) data center in the area. They are incredible users of electricity. Can be a real issue if your power goes out as a result of the extra load.
"
Bubble or not, the current LLMs and other types of "AI" will have a massive impact even if development hits a wall.
I'm currently using Grok for most things because it seems to have more horsepower behind it than the free versions of other LLMs.
The wordsmiths among you may find much to criticize, but this review of the TV drama series, Veronica Mars, by Grok seems very good to me.
Veronica Mars: Noir, Trauma, and Justice
"
I'm skipping Replika, talk to me when the holosuites are available.
"
using the term AI for LLM was marketing genius
The phenomenon is much more widespread than just slapping the "AI" label on LLMs. Almost anything newsworthy that's done by a computer these days is hyped as "AI."
See, for example, this article about Delta's pricing. Someone more knowledgeable than I (which is probably almost everyone here) can correct me if I'm wrong, but Delta's personalized pricing seems to require a big database of personal data that shouldn't be public in the first place (a whole topic in its own right) and an algorithm for analyzing it. In other words, a bog standard computer program.
Another example: a friend of mine recently checked out the conversational capabilities at one of the well known language teaching sites. (I don't know which one.) He labeled the conversation as "AI"-generated, which may in fact be accurate, but it reminded me of Eliza, which was written ~60 years ago.
And then there's this, about which I got nothin'.
The mention of travel agents and bookstores is a good reminder to skeptical me that "AI" is going to have widespread disruptive effects even if it isn't remotely what it's hyped to be.
On “The Schadenfreude Express”
Dubya's regime was malign and incompetent; Bolton was especially malign. But fighting fascism is the priority now.
Thanks to bobbyp for his link on this.
"
IMO John Bolton is appalling in very many ways, and his warmongering often appeared (and was, again IMO) verging on madness.
But Ubu appointed him as one of "the best people" in his first administration, and once he started openly dissing and criticising Ubu and U was POTUS again, and in a position to do something about it, he sicced the FBI on him.
The principle is the thing that matters. This is the sort of thing that does not happen in functioning democracies which respect the rule of law.
"
That is equivalent to supporting former RAF members to overthrow the German government (ok, the German government isn't as bad as the Iranian but the MEK/RAF comparison is apt).
"
If John Bolton appears to be comparatively reasonable we're in trouble...
cf. e.g. his staunch support for the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, or MEK
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/3/29/meks-violent-past-looms-over-us-lobby-for-regime-change-in-iran
"
Besides being a general warmonger, he was a primary cheerleader for the Iraq War. About a year before the US entered Iraq, he wanted to go to war with Cuba for WMDs they didn't have. He stood for about everything bad in Bush's foreign policy.
"
I wonder if Trump going after Fed governor Lisa Cook is an indication that he was having trouble finding even a fig leaf for an attack on Powell.
"
It's hard to have much sympathy for John Bolton. After his role in the Bush administration...
Charles, you've piqued my curiosity. What things did Bolton do under Bush that you disapprove of? I've got my own list, but just wondering what he's done that you disagree with.
"
a ray of light in the darkness:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/25/us/politics/fbi-agent-assault-dc.html?unlocked_article_code=1.hE8.V1Iz.ZBnpGYTcsOAn&smid=url-share
"
It's hard to have much sympathy for John Bolton.
....even a blind squirrel....
for you anti-fascists out there...read this:
https://medium.com/@carmitage/i-researched-every-attempt-to-stop-fascism-in-history-the-success-rate-is-0-a665e2e048a2
are we approaching the precipice or well past it?
"
It's hard to have much sympathy for John Bolton.
....even a blind squirrel....
for you anti-fascists out there...read this:
https://medium.com/@carmitage/i-researched-every-attempt-to-stop-fascism-in-history-the-success-rate-is-0-a665e2e048a2
are we approaching the precipice or well past it?
"
It's hard to have much sympathy for John Bolton.
....even a blind squirrel....
for you anti-fascists out there...read this:
https://medium.com/@carmitage/i-researched-every-attempt-to-stop-fascism-in-history-the-success-rate-is-0-a665e2e048a2
are we approaching the precipice or well past it?
"
It's hard to have much sympathy for John Bolton. After his role in the Bush administration, he should have been pushed into obscurity and never heard from again.
"
To me, what is more interesting is Charles' 'who is this Vance person of which you speak' and at the same time eagerly searching for Youtube videos of UK citizens complaining about Muslims taking over the country. Call it the Texas two-step...
"
That is the upside (such as it is) of Vance replacing Trump at some point. While he would eventually install more competent people in service to a vile agenda, he doesn't have the leverage of being able to threaten Republican politicians with the supporters of the god-king. So he will face serious resistance from those with something resembling principles but no courage.
I suspect that the MAGA true believers will reflexively turn to the approach of the religion they were (mostly) raised in. Turn away from politics and await the second coming of their messiah. The Church of Trump** may get organized as a proper religion by a new leader. But he won't be worshipped. And he won't be Vance.
** Will the Church of Trump replace the Latter Day Saints as America's most successful cult? Hard to say at this point. I'm not seeing a Brigham Young type figure, but there might be one out there.
"
Vance exists to elevate himself and to service the billionaires that have enabled his political career in the hopes of getting their political desires fulfilled. Vance would be less distractible and more motivated in his pursuit of a Project 2025 agenda, cutting deals with the Techno-Oligarch wannabes to make sure that they were rich enough and isolated enough from government interference to not be affected by the restrictions brought in the name of Christian Nationalism.
On the bright side, Vance is a negative-charisma asshat with none of Trump's instincts for the grift. I don't think he'd get the same sort of laughing support that Cheetolini gets, and Newsom would mock him incessantly.
"
He knows what he's saying is false and just says it anyway.
I think this is true. And I think he does it in service of his ambition - he knows that the most likely way for him to be the next POTUS is to slavishly toady to Ubu, and tell whatever lies are necessary to further his aim. It's possible that he thinks that once he is POTUS he will be able to get out from under any Ubu stuff he disagreed with (whatever that may be), but in my opinion he would be an even worse and more dangerous POTUS if that is possible. And my life experience tells me that no matter how bad it is, it can always get worse. The fact that the US has elected Ubu twice gives me no faith that it couldn't happen again, and next time with even more capable, competent and efficient apparatchiks.
"
He can't be wrong about everything all the time... :)
Yes, based on his public utterances, he is demonstrably able to do so.
I don't think Vance is wrong in the sense of being mistaken or misinformed. He's an intelligent person, he understands the reality, and he understands what he is saying.
He's lying. Bullshitting, gaslighting, whatever you want to call it. He speaks intentional falsehoods to obscure the truth and mislead people.
He's a liar.
Trump is also, but I think Trump half-believes his own bullshit. By "half believes" I mean I think his thought process is something like "I want this to be true, so I'm going to act like it is true".
Vance seems, to me, profoundly more cynical than that. He knows what he's saying is false and just says it anyway.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.