I guess I am a luddite now because I refused to "upgrade my best desktop computer to Windoz 11, or throw away my laptop and my wife's desktop because they can't support spyware 11.
My wife has a Dell Desktop with a CD player inside, I have a slightly newer Dell XPS = no CD/DVD Player, and none of our laptops have them. I bought a Dell plug in Player for about $40, though
Didn't expect to see such a comprehensive and utterly necesary discussion of AI, because honestly, we need to figure out how to govern that digital deity before it decides to make us all slave riggers.
I listened to the audiobook version of "If Anyone Builds It, Everybody Dies" due to your recommendation. The beginning explains some technical jargon very well, and it helps us understand the rest of the book. I learned many words, phrases and concepts people will need to influence our fellow citizens why we must pause "super intelligence" development before "... We All Die"!
The primary constitutional arguments against a federal 10-year moratorium on states passing legislation limiting AI regulation revolve around the Tenth Amendment and the principle of federalism, as well as the scope of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause.
A key concern is that such a moratorium would constitute "commandeering" of state legislative authority, a practice the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional.
Here's a breakdown of the main arguments:
1. Tenth Amendment / Anti-Commandeering Doctrine
* Tenth Amendment: This amendment reserves to the states or the people any powers not specifically delegated to the federal government by the Constitution. States traditionally hold "police powers" to legislate for the health, safety, and welfare of their citizens. Regulating technologies like AI often falls under this traditional state authority.
* Anti-Commandeering Doctrine: Supreme Court precedent, notably Murphy v. NCAA, forbids Congress from directly compelling state legislatures to enact or refrain from enacting state laws. A moratorium that explicitly bars states from regulating a broad area like AI for a decade is seen by opponents as a direct command to the states to not legislate, which violates this doctrine and undermines state sovereignty.
2. Commerce Clause and Scope of Federal Power
* Commerce Clause: Congress's power to pass preemptive laws (which override state laws) primarily stems from its authority to regulate interstate commerce.
* Argument Against the Moratorium: Critics argue that Congress's power may not extend to regulating all AI-related activity, especially matters that are purely local, such as an AI system used exclusively by a state agency for state-level purposes (e.g., an AI educational product for in-state schools). If the federal government lacks the constitutional power to regulate an activity, it cannot necessarily prohibit states from regulating it, especially without putting a comprehensive federal law in place.
3. Regulatory Void and Preemption
* Preemption: This is the legal principle, rooted in the Supremacy Clause, that valid federal law overrides conflicting state law.
* Argument Against the Moratorium: While Congress can use "express preemption" to explicitly block state laws, the typical use of preemption involves Congress first establishing its own comprehensive federal regulatory framework. Opponents argue that a moratorium that prohibits state action for 10 years without simultaneously enacting a strong, clear, and comprehensive federal regulatory floor creates a regulatory void. This void leaves citizens unprotected from potential AI harms (e.g., discrimination, privacy violations) for a decade, which is seen as an abdication of governmental responsibility and an overreach of federal power.
In summary, the constitutional challenge boils down to: Does the federal government have the authority to simply tell states "you cannot legislate on this broad topic for ten years," even if the federal government itself has not yet fully legislated on it? Opponents argue that this violates the core balance of power between the federal and state governments protected by the Tenth Amendment.
There is an active effort to call a convention of states under Article 5 to limit this type of federal overreach
Where's the petition to sign, went on Getter and couldn't find it pinned or while scrolling down.
Thanks Joe.
Here ya go!
https://superintelligence-statement.org/
Thanks!
12/03/25
An SSL error has occurred and a secure connection to the server cannot be made.
NSURLErrorDomain
Maybe it’s closed / already done collecting ? Thanks Joebot
I posted the petition on Gettr and happy to report a few folks reposted, and hopefully signed. I’m reporting it all week long.
Please plan a trip to Memphis! 100% MAGA here: we need you to speak on Colossus, please!!!🙏
"Luddites" aka "antichrists" according to Peter Thiel.
Godspeed.
I guess I am a luddite now because I refused to "upgrade my best desktop computer to Windoz 11, or throw away my laptop and my wife's desktop because they can't support spyware 11.
I'm a luddite as well, and I wish they still made computers with the cd player inside. I hate those gaming computers don't want one, don't need one.
My wife has a Dell Desktop with a CD player inside, I have a slightly newer Dell XPS = no CD/DVD Player, and none of our laptops have them. I bought a Dell plug in Player for about $40, though
Nashville! We miss you here!
Definitely coming soon.
Didn't expect to see such a comprehensive and utterly necesary discussion of AI, because honestly, we need to figure out how to govern that digital deity before it decides to make us all slave riggers.
How about Kona, Hawaii? We need you.
I listened to the audiobook version of "If Anyone Builds It, Everybody Dies" due to your recommendation. The beginning explains some technical jargon very well, and it helps us understand the rest of the book. I learned many words, phrases and concepts people will need to influence our fellow citizens why we must pause "super intelligence" development before "... We All Die"!
Very glad it was of value to you!
As always, safe travels, Joe. ♡
I enjoyed your and Max's segment on Bannon's Warroom on hour 2 today.
My favorite 2 authors are on WR right now w my favorite host SKB! Thanks for making my day, gentlemen!
Hope to meet you someday, somewhere in the upper Midwest (Hint: Wisconsin) But do it warmer weather than a Wisconsin winter.
I love Wisconsin!
The primary constitutional arguments against a federal 10-year moratorium on states passing legislation limiting AI regulation revolve around the Tenth Amendment and the principle of federalism, as well as the scope of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause.
A key concern is that such a moratorium would constitute "commandeering" of state legislative authority, a practice the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional.
Here's a breakdown of the main arguments:
1. Tenth Amendment / Anti-Commandeering Doctrine
* Tenth Amendment: This amendment reserves to the states or the people any powers not specifically delegated to the federal government by the Constitution. States traditionally hold "police powers" to legislate for the health, safety, and welfare of their citizens. Regulating technologies like AI often falls under this traditional state authority.
* Anti-Commandeering Doctrine: Supreme Court precedent, notably Murphy v. NCAA, forbids Congress from directly compelling state legislatures to enact or refrain from enacting state laws. A moratorium that explicitly bars states from regulating a broad area like AI for a decade is seen by opponents as a direct command to the states to not legislate, which violates this doctrine and undermines state sovereignty.
2. Commerce Clause and Scope of Federal Power
* Commerce Clause: Congress's power to pass preemptive laws (which override state laws) primarily stems from its authority to regulate interstate commerce.
* Argument Against the Moratorium: Critics argue that Congress's power may not extend to regulating all AI-related activity, especially matters that are purely local, such as an AI system used exclusively by a state agency for state-level purposes (e.g., an AI educational product for in-state schools). If the federal government lacks the constitutional power to regulate an activity, it cannot necessarily prohibit states from regulating it, especially without putting a comprehensive federal law in place.
3. Regulatory Void and Preemption
* Preemption: This is the legal principle, rooted in the Supremacy Clause, that valid federal law overrides conflicting state law.
* Argument Against the Moratorium: While Congress can use "express preemption" to explicitly block state laws, the typical use of preemption involves Congress first establishing its own comprehensive federal regulatory framework. Opponents argue that a moratorium that prohibits state action for 10 years without simultaneously enacting a strong, clear, and comprehensive federal regulatory floor creates a regulatory void. This void leaves citizens unprotected from potential AI harms (e.g., discrimination, privacy violations) for a decade, which is seen as an abdication of governmental responsibility and an overreach of federal power.
In summary, the constitutional challenge boils down to: Does the federal government have the authority to simply tell states "you cannot legislate on this broad topic for ten years," even if the federal government itself has not yet fully legislated on it? Opponents argue that this violates the core balance of power between the federal and state governments protected by the Tenth Amendment.
There is an active effort to call a convention of states under Article 5 to limit this type of federal overreach
When will Dallas tickets post? I want to go!!
https://christoverall.com/article/longform/a-christians-perspective-on-artificial-intelligence/
https://lausanne.org/occasional-paper/christian-faith-and-technology#technology-and-the-life-of-the-church
CS Lewis institute: https://www.cslewisinstitute.org/resources/the-imapct-of-technology-on-the-christian-life/
Another divinity school trying to tackle the issue: https://www.eds.edu/programs/334/divine-code-faith-ai-the-digital-soul