Episode 25: Romney's new child allowance bill + Democrats' Bad Idea
For the Good of the Public | The Morning FivePlay episode
Show notes
Wear is the Love, Episode 25On this week’s episode, we discuss Sen. Mitt Romney’s “Family Security Act 2.0” which is a new child allowance bill that looks a lot like his excellent bill from February 2021. We like a lot about the plan, but do have some critiques. What are your thoughts?We also discuss this article in the NYT, “Democrats’ Risky Bet: Aid G.O.P. Extremists in Spring, Hoping to Beat Them in Fall” about some party operatives’ new strategy of propping up MAGA Republican candidates over more moderate Republican candidates. We have a lot of feelings around this one. It’s a Bad Idea.Episode notes:The croissant TikTokNiskanen Center analysis of the Family Security Act 2.0The Ariana Grande twitter thread, aka one of Michael’s viral momentsSpeaking of 25, you still have time to grab a one-year subscription to this newsletter for $25! We’re deep into midterm season, and we know that daily, there’s something new going on in the world that everyone’s talking about. We’re here to help, and your subscriptions help fund the hours we put into this newsletter and its podcasts.The Top 5 articles for your week:“The Long Shadow of Eugenics in America” (NYT)Because the case of the Relf sisters and their government-forced sterilization has had decades of ramifications: “The concept of reparations has long been contentious, debated in Congress and elsewhere as a question of what is owed to U.S. citizens who are descendants of those who were enslaved centuries ago. But the steps to compensate the living victims of forced sterilization can also be understood as reparations, and with three states having done so, new pressure has been placed on the remaining 29 states and the federal government itself.”“Some Quick Thoughts on LaMBDA and Sentience” (Substack - Out of the Ordinary)Because this short Substack piece on what “sentient” actually means in the AI world and how we’re talking over one another right now on this issue is actually helpful. In particular, “Lemoine’s case also demonstrates the ease with which future AI systems may be able to manipulate humans. The large language models of five, ten, and twenty years from today are likely to be far superior to LaMBDA. How many people will these systems be able to convince of their sentience? My guess is that Lemoine is merely an early adopter of a view that will, in future decades, be held by a non-trivial share of people. And once a non-trivial fraction of people think AI systems are sentient the odds that AI comes to dominate our institutions go up. People often ask how a generally intelligent but disembodied AI could wreak havoc in physical reality; this is one clear path.”“The End of the Asset Economy” (The Atlantic)Because “‘Why not take the loan?’ has been a pretty good summary of American wealth building and class dynamics in the past few decades. An extended period of low interest rates has translat --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/wear-we-are/support Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
