8 Comments
User's avatar
Angela Teiken Heitzman's avatar

Yes, they are still here.

Punkette's avatar

Thank you for keeping us updated on Minnesota! 💙

Michael Parker's avatar

I love seeing your collaboration with Mercado!!

Brian Burrell's avatar

As an American, I am so incredibly proud of Minnesotans!

Lt. Cmdr. Christina Jennings's avatar

🚩🏴‍☠️ SKYNET TERMINATOR A.I. HAS BECOME A REALITY 🏴‍☠️🚩

Written by:

Capt. Talia Hansen

No Artificial Intelligence Powered Autonomous Weapons “And/or" Mass Domestic Surveillance Of United States Citizens Can Ever Be Allowed! Will NOT Be Allowed As Long As I Have Breath In My Body! NEVER!!!

The arrogance, hubris, and lack of empathy and humility with regards to the impending dangers and destructive effects of AI technology is truly unbelievable and unacceptable.

Is it any wonder Trump just happened to forget to mention this to the country at the SOTU, however, even if he had've remembered, his sycophantic cult members in Congress would've gave him another standing ovation, I'm sure:

"U.S.A.!" U.S.A!" "HEIL TRUMP!" "AMERICA IS THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE!" Pathetic.

*This excellent video by popular YT content creator “Penguinz0" explains the urgent, dangerous, and truly dire situation perfectly:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=9T8blyb5_Uw&si=o60b9-MItDZbzyiO

Leah Baum's avatar

I never believed the lies coming out of this fascist regime especially when it comes to ICE criminal traitors leaving Minneapolis.

Kelvin Hobbs's avatar

[Before There Was The Roberts’ Court] A return to the antebellum Constitution. The Rehnquist Court; The New Republic, 10-March-1982 https://tinyurl.com/mtfvytd5

[Before joining the Supreme Court in 1972,] Rehnquist ardently and aggressively fought against the liberal ideas that were [fundamental to] the Warren Court. While still a clerk …, he wrote a memorandum in defense of the Plessy v. Ferguson decision of 1896, which constitutionally legitimated Jim Crow laws … “the argument made by Thurgood, not John Marshall that a majority may not deprive a minority of its constitutional right, the answer must be made that while this is sound in theory, in the long run it is the majority who will determine what the constitutional rights of the minority are." [In 1967], Rehnquist … opposed a proposal … for a voluntary exchange of students to reduce segregation. "[W]e are no more dedicated to an 'integrated' society … than we are to a 'segregated' society." Rehnquist [is] no conservative as that term is ordinarily understood … [but] a revisionist of a particular ideological bent. He repudiates precedents; he shows no deference to the legislative branch; and he is unable to ground state autonomy in any textual provision of the Constitution. Rehnquist thus uses state autonomy less to promote liberty than to promote property [and] to repudiate the central value promoted by the Warren Court—equality.