Pellicot. Cornell

Cornell is in a spot of trouble. There are accusations of rape being leveled at members of a fraternity exacerbate by claimed mishandling of the case by Cornell University, the school's police and the real police and district attorney in Ithaca. No arrests were made and there seems to have been a failure to communicate. Cornell's internal investigation resulted in minimal punishment with the initiator and the guy who solicited more participants both expelled (permanently) but the other five writing essays or sensitivity training. If you've seen the solicitation texts (check European media) it is clear that neither the guy sending or any guy responding deserves a place in civilized society. 

So maybe we're not civilized.

But we're not the only ones. France has had the Pelicot rape case that occurred in the southeast of the country, where a man drugged his wife and solicited, over the internet, men to come to their home and rape her.  This spanned several years and he was only found out when he was caught upskirting women and videos of his wife's repeated rapes were found in the ensuing search of his computer.  He and fifty, that's right fifty, other men were found guilty on charges ranging from sexual assault, attempted rape and rape. Pelicot was also found guilty of raping a co-defendant's wife, when the co-defendant decided to adopt the Pelicot paradigm and began drugging his wife to have other men rape her. Something virtually identical occurred in the UK, a husband drugging his wife, then inviting men to rape her. 

Something is profoundly wrong with men.

These cases have much in common. They both make a pretty powerful case for capital punishment, though one must wonder if even this would be an effective deterrent. There is a clear undercurrent of men seeing women as something sub-human or just some thing. Anything but another human being to be respected as such. The texts, the solicitations, are convincing proof. 

There are also differences. Given the unlimited supply of vitriol spewing from the internet it is no wonder the woman in the Cornell case has remained anonymous. Nonetheless there have been victim shaming and blaming and some suggestions this is just another Duke LaCrosse hoax. This woman is young and the thought of public harassment haunting her for the rest of her, hopefully long, life is terrifying. The wife in Pelicot case, Gisèle, being quite a bit older, chose the opposite path, appearing in court every day of the trial. She has become a symbol of the abuse and oppression that women endure, and have since time began. 

This will continue until men treat women like people. 

Neo-NIMBY

Dunwoody has a data center in it. Has had for some time. In the perimeter area. Great place for one, with both power and data infrastructure. And it has gone without notice for some years. Now, for who knows what reason, data centers are the mark of the devil and must be stopped. Rouse the rabble. Get the pro protesters on the job. The owners of the data center are prepping for renovations and "neighbors are concerned" as if they don't know these renovations are a temporary issue. But today's virtue signaling is "I'm Against Data Centers." "I Stand With Ukraine" is so yesterday.  

Let's be clear: there are going to be data centers. You may prefer they not be located near you. Not in your backyard. When did that become acceptable? Apparently when war was declared against data centers. Maybe you'd like data centers far, far removed from your driveway. Maybe on the other side of the globe. Perhaps in a competing nation. Perhaps an adversarial nation. Sure. Why not? Let's give all kinds of sensitive data to those countries. Isn't that what we ended up doing with TikTok? 

The point of the spear for the anti-data center protesters is electricity, in the hopes that they can convince the gen-pop that their power bills will balloon. They've given up on water as it doesn't resonate and won't play well in Atlanta, which is notorious for abusing regional water supplies. So electricity it is. The anti-s scored a recent victory getting the town of Lovejoy to rescind a commitment other support a data center in their town and so it will go somewhere else. What the folks beating the power bill drum seem to have never seen or heard of is one of these:

These are towers supporting overhead power lines that distribute electricity all across this great state (and country) of ours. That's because NIMBY-s of yore did not want a power plant anywhere near them. But, if you live in daVille, and get out at all, you've probably see several of them. These protesters don't know what these things do or think you don't, because what this means is the data center you can't see because it is out of town is going to use the very same electricity it would have were it in lovely downtown Dunwoody. Same electricity, generated at the same power plants, and purchased from the same power company. If, and it is an if, data center power consumption causes your bill to increase then it really doesn't matter if the data center is in Lovejoy, Cordele or Dunwoody. Pushing them into Alabama won't really help either, because...Southern Company. 

If you're advocating no data centers, not near me, not even in the US, then you're advocating for US technical inferiority. 

Whiz Quiz

You've had a job, haven't you? Of course you have. And to get that job you probably had to make that little Yellow Oath of Loyalty. Not required by the government, but subsidized by them, so as to skirt any Fourth Amendment issues. It is worth noting that the Whiz Quiz is a suspicionless drug test, and that it is pre-employment. This is very much like the governments' suspicionless, warrantless AI powered pervasive surveillance of the public. 

Maybe there is something to this suspicionless monitoring.

How about this: unless and until government stops their surveillance of us, we have government bureaucrats and elected officials subjected to post-employment, random, suspicionless drug tests. You know, just in case. After all, drug abuse might explain some of the silly shit coming out of city hall. Drugs in. Stupid out. 

Let's see how they like being treated like a bad actor until proven otherwise.

Something Left Out

The city is fixin' to git ready to adopt some rules around the use of AI. Well, some AI, but not all AI. Notably missing is any mention of Agentic AI. You know, the kind of AI that improves efficacy of operations, reduces headcount and associated cost of operation. Heaven forbid agentic AI should be THE assistant city manager, an assistant that works 7x24 at a much, much lower cost than an organic, 40 hour, assistant. This city could optimize operations while reducing costs.

They won't.

Heaven forbid that payroll should right-size. This is government, no competition, nothing but expansion. Optimization is not an issue. In fact, optimization is kryptonite to government bureaucrats. They intend to use GenAI to make their jobs easier without any reduction in staff and certainly not forgoing their guaranteed annual raise. 

Another reason they will never use Agentic AI is because an important use would be auditing city operations. That means surveillance of city employees as they are doing their jobs. As long as they are in control, AI is for surveilling you, not them.

And the rules are pretty wishy-washy. They are going to offer training on AI but not require it. No indication that annual training for proper (and improper) use of this (or any other) technology will be in place. Hell, they didn't require it for cops, so why would they do this with desk jockeys?

Trust Must Be Earned

And AI is NOT earning it.

It all started with a simple question intended to help resolve a scheduling conflict. "Is the 'Autumn in the Mountains Car Show' always on the last weekend of September?" This info is not directly on the organizer's web site, but past event dates could be manually searched to see if history supports the assertion. But manually? Isn't that what AI-powered smart Giggles are for? And so it was Giggled, and Gemini responded.

And Gemini is wrong, at least in the particulars. 

History indeed indicates the event is not always held on the last weekend in September and isn't consistently even the fourth Saturday. Fair enough. Top level answer is correct if you can trust AI. But can you? Well, AI suggests the answer is no, in the very answer given above. The event was held on 9/26/26, but this past Saturday is not the "second-to-last" Saturday (whatever that really means), and is, in fact, the fourth and last Saturday of September 2026. It must take a silicon based mind to think that is "second-to-last."

So...do you trust AI? Do you trust AI to be the ubiquitous, all seeing, all knowing overlord of your, and your family's, life? If so, you are either a city bureaucrat, or an elected official who enjoys private (not secret...no, no, not secret) get-togethers with corporate bigwigs. Otherwise, asking simple questions, either of these folks, or AI itself, will destroy any trust you may have had. Wouldn't it? Hasn't it?

So why have we allowed these folks to replace organic intelligence with the artificial variety, especially in the domain of public safety? If, in your opinion, this is the wrong decision, you may want to consider replacing these folks who clearly disagree.

Gimme Shelter

If AI companies are anything they are smart. And they are learning. They are learning a lot from what has recently happened to social media operations, including some of their very own. Once high-flying, they've had their wings clipped, and some jurisdictions have an outright ban on social media for minors. There have been quite a few, very large, court awards that are costing enormous amounts of money and impacting their operations at additional cost. It is also a PR nightmare that may bleed over to AI operations.

They do not want to endure rinse and repeat with their AI operations. 

That's why they want to put on the brakes. Not because they really want to, but because they want to avoid a future where they will be crushed by fines and overbearing restrictions. So what they want to do is slow their roll until they can get regulations in place. Regulations they can live with, and while somewhat restrictive, the real goal is to offload any, perhaps all, future liability. They want regulations, crafted by their lobbyists, that they can easily follow, and if they do, any Bad Things are because of the politicians and regulators. After all, they were in compliance with all laws, rules and regulations. 

They also know that once these regulations are passed, politicians will have their name on them, politicians who are now politically motivated to defend the AI industry rather than attack it. How do the AI firms know this will work? Because that is exactly what Flock has done.

These actions will not prevent all future lawsuits but it will provide shelter from those enormous jury awards. 

Is It Misinformation?

Is it misinformation if it isn't intentional? If it is intentional is that disinformation? Can incompetence, say in reporting, be mere misinformation? 

Here's what we have.

There are a few things wrong with this. First, Dunwoody doesn't have a fire department, so those cannot be Dunwoody firefighters. They are (maybe?) DeKalb County firefighters, and thank god for that. Then, as it turns out, or so history tells us, 2977 people did not die in the twin towers on 1 Sept 2001. However 2977 did die in the terrorists' attack on the twin towers ten days after that date.

You have to wonder how much time must pass for events to become history, and historical facts that set the record straight when someone prevaricates. A week? A month? Years? Decades? Perhaps time is not the measure. Perhaps it is acceptance. Entry into the zeitgeist. Sometimes folks forget. Some never knew. Approximately 103 million people in America today were born after 9/11. It was never part of their existence. Over half of Americans were born after that last helicopter lifted off in Saigon. Is 9/11 headed to the same place as Vietnam? Some sepia stained story told by increasingly irrelevant old farts? Is it already there?

Nothing More Conservative...

...than a liberal.

Resist!

The very essence of "resist" is fight the change. Sounds like the conservative affection for preservation. Yet now this is coming from the self-professed radical left. Or, nearby, those that refuse to disclose openly, pretending it isn't the most open secret in daVille. Everyone sees the true colors. 

Ironically these are the folks trying their dead level best to create an overarching surveillance state. That seems like something you'd expect from the law-and-order camp. You know, the folks the lefties call nut-jobs. But it is the "abolish cash bail" folks who want everyone continuously surveilled by AI. 

And then, these same proponents of AI surveillance are sending their army of cultivated protestors out to condemn any and all data centers. The same data centers used by AI systems. What is their long game? Let China completely dominate the data center market? So, their plan is to use AI for heavy-handed surveillance of all of us, but to also have all that data hosted in China. Or would they hide that behind "unintended consequences" which is the most common outcome for any government activity? Ooops.

That's not the real problem. The real problem is these fools were elected, and they probably will be again.

Let AI Do It

It is time for a start.Well past time, in fact. Since before this city was formed there was a sincere dedication to opacity. Did you ever see the officially published Task Force reports? No? Well, there's a reason for that. They, many of whom fancied themselves the powers-to-be, had no intention of anything resembling full disclosure. So no surprise that this city keeps all the juicy bits of information behind an enormously expensive pay wall. Might as well be locked up in Fort Knox. 

We can do better.

And it is easy to do because we can let AI do it for us. And we can start with the easy button, addressing opacity with a "service" that is a self-proclaimed leader in the use of AI. That's right. Let's use Flock on Flock. Start simple. Post a daily report of all the license plate numbers, with state, captured inside the city limits. Stretch goal: list the number of times that day the plate was surveilled. Then any of us, we the little people, would have automatic access to public data. It would be fun just to sift thru the grift looking for out of state plates, your own plate, your spouse's plate, your neighbors...this could replace death scrolling. 

So how will the city say no?

They may pay-wall it or just claim it is too expensive. Really? This truly would be trivial for damn near any half-assed IT geek, and frankly requires no AI. There are other fun things that AI could be used for, but this is no heavy lift. But, it is critically important not to strain the brains of the city bureaucrats. Keep it stupid. Simple? There is one thing they will probably bring up as an excuse for not doing this: privacy. Kinda sucks the air out of the room, doesn't it? They've justified their overarching surveillance because this is all in public, tracking plates that are required to operate vehicles in public, so there is no privacy. How could there possibly be a privacy issue posting this info? There isn't. They just think you are that stupid.

They have some proof on their side. After all, you did vote them in.

Becoming George

Not THAT George. This isn't about George Sand, even though that book is on the TOD Book Club reading list. This is about the other George, George Orwell, and his prophetic work, Nineteen Eighty-Four, though off the mark by 42 years. But we made it.

The BBR editorialist has been sucked into the doublethink by way of newspeak. Case in point is his use of the word safety and a rather bold statement regarding police officers preventing crime. By and large, and as previously observed, police do not actually prevent crime, they respond once a crime has been [allegedly] committed. Even when "keeping the peace" at protests and rallies, the police are restricted from action unless and until someone actually crosses a line. 

Some might argue that a police presence discourages, perhaps prevents, criminal behavior. But no one really believes that, especially the police, or the department would deploy officers in ways dramatically different to their clearly preferred protocol. Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon may be a thing, but the separation between police and actually preventing crime is far, far greater.

That's why use of the word safety in this context is clearly newspeak attempting to create and enforce a perception unassociated with reality. But, one might further argue that these new surveillance systems, being enhanced with AI, can now predict with some level of accuracy, that some one might be, or might soon be, engaged in unacceptable activities, allowing the police to apprehend the individual prior to the actual commission of a crime. That might qualify as safety, unless of course you're apprehended when that AI mischaracterizes your behavior.

If you have ever wondered, as so very few of you have, how it came to be that so many sensible Germans were seduced to the dark side in the 1930's, now you know.