AI Ethics: Apparently “The Ethicist” Has Decided To Only Answer Stupid Questions From Now On…

/ Jack Marshall / Leave a comment

This is the latest question from an ethics-challenged boob that “The Ethicist” (the New York Times Magazine’s ethics advice columnist, Kwame Anthony Appiah) thinks is worthy of discussion and publication:

“Can I Have an A.I. Chatbot Field My Mother’s Endless Complaints?” “Would using a chatbot as an emotional buffer be compassionate, or would we be failing in our filial duty by substituting an algorithm for a child’s attention?”—Name Withheld

Wow. No wonder you withheld your name from being attached to that disgusting suggestion, Whoever You Are. If you didn’t, everyone with an ethical brain cell left would know you’re a heartless asshole.

The answer is “No!” Sure, you can do it, just as you can set the neighbor’s dog on fire. But it’s obviously unethical, wrong, unforgivable, and a terrible idea. Of course it is. Gee, would it be all right to substitute a bot for actual parenting when your child is upset? Oooh, tough one! Would it be ethical to have chatbot in the confession booth while the priest takes a nap?

I wrote this before bothering to read what good ol’ Kwame wrote. Let’s see…

Ugh. “The Ethicist” actually thinks this abdication of family duty might be justifiable! He writes,

“The fact that a chatbot is no substitute for human companionship doesn’t mean it can’t play a useful role when other people aren’t available. You owe your mother attention and companionship, but not in unlimited quantities. It’s relevant that you and your brother are feeling exhausted by emotional demands that exceed what you can reasonably supply. If your mother would feel better having an A.I. chat partner, that counts as a reason to provide one.”

The last sentence is a despicable cheat. “If your mother would feel like she was getting exactly the same amount of attention and loving concern from a machine that she obviously needs from her children, then why not?” That’s a self-ratifying proposition. It would be just as valid if you substituted “trained snail” or “inanimate carbon rod” for “machine.”

If my parents , or my wife or my sister, or my son felt the need to talk to me, and especially me, for any reason important to them, I would be there for them, and they knew it. There was no limit. There would never be a limit. The same is true of any friend. (My clients, on the other hand, pay for the privilege) If I were running short of time due to other commitments, I would say so with apologies, but promise to be available as soon as possible. What I would never say is, “Hey, here’s a bot you can talk to. Good luck!”

You can read the whole exchange here. If I were you, I’d use my time more judiciously.

Wow. Who CAN You Trust In 2026? The Latest: Rigging Bar Exam Scores….

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

[For the pop culture history challenged, that was the title card for Johnny Carson’s first TV show, a sort-of quiz show that was really just a set-up for Johnny to ad lib and be clever. If you don’t know who Johnny Carson was, shame on you.]

Nancie Givens, former executive director of the Arkansas Office of Professional Programs, was arrested and charged with 65 felony counts of tampering with public records. An investigation “uncovered extensive irregularities involving Arkansas Bar Examination scores spanning from July 2020 through July 2025.” Prosecutor Will Jones said in a release,

“As Prosecuting Attorney, I recognize the responsibility Ms. Givens was entrusted with to safeguard the accuracy of bar examination results and preserve the records supporting them,” Jones said in the release. “The charges concern how she handled those specific duties, including the alteration of exam results and the destruction of supporting records.”

The investigation is ongoing. It isn’t clear how or why Givens altered those bar exam results. Here she is…

(Yikes)

You can read the details as we have them so far here. My rule is never to trust anyone who spells “Nancy” as “Nancie,” but that’s just me.

Ethics Quiz: The Sentimental Cheer-Off

/ Jack Marshall / 21 Comments

This is an “Awww!” story that rings some ethics alarms. Heartwarming but stupid. Kindness and courage marred by toxic empathy and a rejection of merit for “feelz.” I’m interested in where you come out on the The Sentimental Cheer-Off Affair.

14-year-old Jorgia Walls from Lawrenceville, Georgia, an eighth-grader, found herself the only remaining member of her cheerleading team for the Peachtree Ridge Youth Athletic Association. It was an eight-girl squad in early summer but had dwindled to just Jorgia by September. Ethics Alarm #1: That’s a teeny bit suspicious, don’t you think? It sounds like mutant of two Kirsten Dunst movies, “Drop Dead Gorgeous” and “Bring It On.” The AOL story casually says the strange exodus resulted from “the summer heat in Georgia” and “family factors.” Seven cheerleaders quitting the same squad? What a coinkydink…

Walls refused the options of joining the seventh-grade team or quitting the eighth grade squad herself, but instead decided (with the complicity of the cheerleading squad’s coach) to keep cheering on the eighth-grade football team all by herself. THIS reminds me of a memorable Monty Python segment where space aliens (who look like giant puddings) turn all of Earth’s tennis players into non-playing Scotsmen so the aliens can win Wimbledon. The sole un-transformed human tennis pro has to play himself by running around to both sides of the net. A single cheerleader is almost as silly but not as funny. (cont.)

Pages: 1 2

Friday Post Mid-Terms Open Forum

/ Jack Marshall / 45 Comments

There is good news on the cultural front: Salon, the far, far left web publication that has been stocked with extremists and crazies since its beginnings, announced yesterday that it is ceasing publication. Good. You can read its EA dossier here: eventually I just stopped paying attention about five years ago, and my sock drawer was the direct beneficiary. This made me wonder what had become of the other bonkers far, far left site, The Daily Kos. I hadn’t heard much from that biased mess in years (last EA mention: 2017). So I checked: unfortunately, it is still making people dumber. Here’s a typical headline from the home page: “Republicans lost because voters were sick of their sh-t.”

About that Babylon Bee joke above: I couldn’t resist, because it is harsh but fair, and also astute.

Now regarding your duties regarding today’s open forum, as Hedley says,

From The Res Ipsa Loquitur Files:

/ Jack Marshall / 23 Comments

What an asshole.

The Axis news media unconscionably supported this creep. Imagine the outrage if a Republican candidate treated a reporter that way.

The GOP’s Anti-Biological Males In Women’s Sports Emphasis: Bad Campaign Strategy But Still The Ethical Thing To Do

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

The long knives and fingers have come out in Conservative Land as its denizens and their consultants decide who’s to blame for Tuesday’s electoral wipe-out. One theme is that the GOP’s emphasis on the Left’s wacko insistence on “trans rights,” including the right of a male athlete to just declare that he is a she and now could excel in the female version of the sport he stunk at as a male was foolish.

The issue just didn’t matter to most voters, they are saying. The obvious dishonesty and injustice didn’t involve many people either. In other words, “Who cares?”, “So what?” and “To hell with those girls!” What mattered is “affordability”: you know, the fake issue Democrats came up with to hold the Trump Administration responsible for the high prices caused by the Biden Administration.

This kind of thinking—unethical thinking—is the Iran war and Democrat-sponsored anti-Semitism in microcosm. The Trump Administration took necessary steps to end Iran’s nuclear threat, its sponsorship of terrorism, and at home, the illegal persecution of Jewish students on college campuses, but never mind: what it should have been concentrating on wasn’t lives, prejudice and justice, but what most Americans care about: themselves. The consultant calculus was followed this cycle in other areas, such as abortion: Republican candidates for state office barely whispered opposition to the legalized killing of millions of unborn human beings. Not prudent. Embryos don’t vote. (cont.)

Pages: 1 2

McDonald’s Is Being Sued Over “The McRib”: Good!

/ Jack Marshall / 19 Comments

Also, yecchh.

A class-action lawsuit against McDonald’s looks like it is going to go forward after to proceed, after U.S. District Judge April Perry ruled that it was premature to conclude that consumers would be unreasonable to expect that the seasonal pork sandwich offering contained rib meat. Plaintiffs allege the sandwich’s name and rib-shaped patty deliberately mislead customers because the thing contains no pork rib meat.

Gee, why would anyone think that a sandwich called the “McRib” and shaped to look like spare ribs would contain pork rib meat?

One survey presented as evidence found in the court filing found that 72% of respondents expected the McRib to contain rib meat. Another found that 67% considered rib meat important or very important to their purchasing decision. Wow, people are getting more cynical by the hour: 28% expect to be lied to in advertising. Even food advertising! I must confess, when I bought a McRib, I assumed that it contained rib meat—which made it surprising that it tasted like crap and had a disgusting texture. The law suit claims that the McRib should be called the McLow-grade-pork-products, because it really contains just pork shoulder, heart, tripe and stomach. (cont.)

Pages: 1 2

More Post-Election Eve Ethics Observations

/ Jack Marshall / 3 Comments

1. The media can’t stop themselves from using extreme rhetoric to describe this “blue wave”: “monumental,” “catastrophic,” “historic.” It was, in fact, a pretty typical wipe out of the controlling party in a mid-term election, and certainly not the “extinction level event” Ron DeSantis claimed in the aftermath. Wouldn’t it be nice if reporters, pundits and public figures bothered to learn some history? I guess its more fun to make people fearful and hysterical.

Here are the worst post-WW II losses by a President’s party:

  • 2010 Barack Obama lost 63 House seats (and 6 Senate seats), the largest modern midterm swing.
  • 1946 Harry S Truman lost 56 House seats and 12 Senate seats.
  • 1994 Bill Clinton lost 54 House seats and 8 Senate seats.
  • 1958 Dwight Eisenhower lost 50 House seats and 13 Senate seats.
  • 1974 Gerald Ford lost 48 House seats and 4 Senate seats.
  • And in 2018, Trump lost 41 House seats.

But that’s peanuts compared to mid-term losses in Congress suffered by earlier Presidents. Grover Cleveland lost 125 seats in 1894! In 1874, President Grant lost 98 seats in the House. Heck, even FDR got clobbered in 1938, losing 72 seats. (cont.)

Pages: 1 2

Deconstructionists United vs The United States of America

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

Guest post by peanutclearly45eb6e57bb

Many constituencies of discontent seem to have coalesced into a unified front with the objective of destroying the founding principles and proven long-held values of the United States. This intersectional dissent is represented by the BIPOC/LGBTQ+ flags flying seemingly everywhere in place of the Stars and Stripes.

Broadly speaking, these constituencies are deconstructionists, seeking to take apart nearly everything that had made America great and reassemble it in their preferred order. They seem to assume everyone will get along once the capitalist, white, heterosexual, Judeo-Christian, Constitutional, patriarchal society is relegated to the dustbin of history or the reeducation camps.

What are these constituencies and what new reality do they plan to deliver that will make all the evils they’ve experienced in the United States disappear in the rearview mirror of history? [Cont.]

Pages: 1 2

Why Can’t “The Stupid Party” Figure Out How to Appeal to Stupid Voters and Other Ethics Observations on the Mid-Terms (Corrected and Expanded)

/ Jack Marshall / 51 Comments

I could have written most of this post two days ago and it would have been exactly the same. But there is always hope and optimism, and I am a sap at heart.

1. Black entrepreneur and pundit Adam Coleman nailed it in his substack. He writes in part,

…When you’re glued into politics, reading blogs, scrolling through social media, you get inundated with niche issues and everyone is trying to convince you that this is the defining problem that will swing an election…And it never really is. These are usually tertiary to the real reason the average person who barely cares about politics got in their car and drove to the polls; kind of like a protest drive since gas prices are relatively high. The country isn’t split between hardcore Democrats and Republicans because clustered in the middle are fickle and swing voters who are reacting to the moment. These are people who selectively vote (even if they predominantly vote for one party) or might vote for both parties. These are regular Americans who pay more attention to their wallets than what some Ivy League economist says about the economy. I once heard someone describe the economy for the average person as a “vibe” versus a reality and I think they’re kind of right…Pretty much every president has low approval ratings, or at least periods of low approval ratings that coincided with midterm elections.Right or wrong, the economic woes of the public will always be put at the feet of the president. If the stock market sucks, it’s the president’s fault. If you can’t afford DoorDash like you used to, it’s the president’s fault.

The midterms are the way for the American public to punish the president in power. Yes, the typical political discussions matter, like quality of candidates etc. However, if people are angry and emotional, they don’t generally make rational decisions. If the reason for them voting is based on spite, do you really have a chance of changing their minds? You can’t fact your way out of shifting an emotional voter.

I kept getting the same irrational response Coleman describes from even more politically engaged friends and relatives, despite the fact that the rate of inflation has come down since the Biden administration, and even though the recent GNP report showed vivid economic growth.

2. What creates a “vibe” that is illusory and manipulative? The news media, of course. (Cont.)

Pages: 1 2