#Arkhaven INFOGALACTIC #Castalia House
A lot of authors are very excited about the announcement of the Anthropic settlement that promises to pay out about $3,000 per work to the authors whose work was pirated.
There’s just one problem: the settlement excludes 92.8 percent of the pirated works, including pretty much all foreign authors, foreign publishers – including Castalia House – and self-published authors. Even worse, there is absolutely no path to legal redress for them in the US courts.
AI Central explains why.
I very much doubt the recent federal appeals court ruling striking down President Trump’s emergency tariffs is going to survive Supreme Court review:
A federal appeals court on Friday struck down President Donald Trump’s use of emergency powers granted by Congress to impose tariffs, opening the door for the administration to potentially have to repay billions worth of duties.
The 7-4 ruling raises doubt about deals Trump has struck with the European Union, Japan, South Korea and other major trading partners to reduce the “reciprocal” tariff rates on their imports, from the levels the administration originally set in April.
“We conclude Congress … did not give the president wide-ranging authority to impose tariffs” of the kind Trump imposed in his sweeping executive orders, the majority wrote.
The ruling also invalidates the tariffs that Trump has imposed on China, Canada and Mexico to pressure those countries to do more to stop shipments of fentanyl and precursor chemicals from entering the United States.
The decision, however, will not take effect until Oct. 14, giving the Trump administration time to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.
The fact is that Congress already delegated the necessary power to the Executive Branch more than 50 years ago. This is why President Trump declared his tariffs to be necessary due to national security concerns, which are considerably more valid than the average “national security concern” that is utilized to justify so many federal government actions.
Historically, Congress set tariffs and maintained tight control over this power. However, over time, particularly after the Great Depression, there was a shift towards delegating some authority to the executive branch. This began with the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934, allowing the President to negotiate trade agreements without separate congressional approval each time. Later acts, such as the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and the Trade Act of 1974, further evolved this delegated authority. These allowed the President to act on national security concerns through tariffs or respond to unfair foreign trade practices.
And anyhow, all President Trump has to do is declare an “emanation” or a “penumbra” and he’ll be good to go. September promises to be an interesting month in more ways than one.
While actual Americans are horrified by the needless deaths of a family, the Punjabis are trying to get their fellow Punjabi who was responsible let off the hook for his crimes.
We, the undersigned, urge Governor Ron DeSantis and the Florida Board of Executive Clemency to re-examine and reduce the sentence for a 28-year-old truck driver involved in a fatal U-turn crash on Florida’s Turnpike in South Florida. This was a tragic accident — not a deliberate act. While accountability matters, the severity of the charges against him does not align with the circumstances of the incident.
Key Considerations & Precedent:
No criminal intent or history: The incident was a catastrophe, not a criminal act. The driver has no prior record and fully cooperated with authorities.Petition Requests:
Consider alternative sentencing options, such as restorative justice measures, counseling, or community service, aligning with both accountability and compassion.Conclusion:
By granting clemency, you would reaffirm the value of proportional justice, the power of community advocacy, and the potential for rehabilitation. We believe this case is not just about one individual—it speaks to the broader principles of fairness and mercy in the justice system.With deep respect and hope,
Collective Punjabi youth.
I suspect Americans would vastly prefer to see the “Collective Punjabi youth” repatriated to India than see their petition honored by Gov. DeSantis.
There is no such thing as a “multiracial nation”. The concept of “multiculturalism” is a lie. There are always and only multiple nations competing for control of a society’s resources, culture, and laws.
An high-ranking pedo was not only released and allowed to leave Nevada after being arrested and charged, but was even permitted to flee the country:
A senior Israeli official was arrested in the United States earlier this month and charged with seeking sexual conduct with a minor, only to be released on bail with no conditions or monitoring, allowing him to flee to Israel. The case involving Tom Artiom Alexandrovich in Nevada is now stirring controversy, with politicians and social media commentators accusing the government of interfering in the judicial process to allow the cybersecurity official to return home without facing justice.
Court records from Nevada’s Clark County show that Alexandrovich was charged with luring or attempting to lure a child online to engage in sexual conduct – a felony that carries up to 10 years in jail in the case of a conviction. He was released on a $10,000 bond, but no monitoring appeared to take place.
Richard Davies, a criminal defence lawyer in Nevada, told Al Jazeera that the apparent lack of conditions on Alexandrovich’s release despite the seriousness of the charges was “fishy”.
“Average Joe gets arrested, he would appear in front of the justice of the peace within 24 hours. The justice of the peace in that county would issue bail conditions, which very typically would include a GPS device, restrictions on movement, not being allowed to leave the state,” Davies said.
“So the fact that this individual was not only allowed to leave without an ankle bracelet or a GPS device, not only to leave the state, but also leave the country, is highly unusual and suspect.”
This is why no more dual-nationals can be permitted to vote or hold office anywhere in the world. Whether they are Jewish or Somali, it has been repeatedly demonstrated that the only thing they really care about is their fellow nationals, which most certainly does not mean Americans even when they happen to be U.S. citizens. Dual-nationalism shouldn’t even be legal, and at least in the USA, it’s not even actually law.
If it’s true that the U.S. government was not involved, then Occam’s Razor would focus attention on the nationality of the judge who let the pedo run away to what is apparently a sanctuary zone for child abusers.
The media is portraying this recent judicial action as the banning of a fictitious, imaginary, and non-existent group.
Russia’s highest court has declared the “international satanism movement” an extremist and terrorist group, despite the organization not actually existing. Members of this non-existent group could face up to eight years in prison.
Senior MP Andrei Kartapolov, who heads the Russian parliament’s defense committee, made unverified claims that Western funding was fueling satanism in Russia, posing a “direct threat to Russian statehood.” This ruling by the Kremlin’s Supreme Court on the imaginary movement is the latest in President Vladimir Putin’s series of crackdowns on ideological dissent in Russia.
It follows his characterization of the war in Ukraine as a holy battle against the “satanic” West.
The Prosecutor General’s Office issued a statement describing the non-existent “satanist” group as one “based on extremist ideology, hatred and hostility toward traditional religious confessions.” The fictitious movement was also accused of causing “destruction, damage and desecration” of Russian Orthodox churches.
It would be wise for President Trump to issue an executive order doing the same. I just wonder how long it will take before the media starts shrieking about the banning of this non-existent group being anti-semitic?
Most people don’t realize that China already did this starting back in 2010, although it’s usually just portrayed as a campaign against “Western values”.
I’m not even remotely surprised that Epic won its case against Google over the Play Store. If we’ve learned anything, it’s that the game developers are smarter than the Big Tech guys and all their Silicon Valley lawyers:
A federal appeals court has upheld a jury verdict condemning Google’s Android app store as an illegal monopoly, clearing the way for a federal judge to enforce a potentially disruptive shakeup that’s designed to give consumers more choices.
The unanimous ruling issued Thursday by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals delivers a double-barreled legal blow for Google, which has been waylaid in three separate antitrust trials that resulted in different pillars of its internet empire being declared as domineering scofflaws monopolies since late 2023.
The unsuccessful appeal represents a major victory for video game maker Epic Games, which launched a legal crusade targeting Google’s Play Store for Android apps and Apple’s iPhone app store nearly five years ago in an attempt to bypass exclusive payment processing systems that charged 15% to 30% commissions on in-app transactions.
This is good news. It should make it a lot easier to get apps on the platforms that people prefer to utilize on their phones.
A French court overturns the convictions of two French women:
Two women convicted of defaming French first lady Brigitte Macron by saying she was ‘born a man’ were today sensationally cleared on appeal.
Judges sitting at the Paris Appeal Court on Thursday ruled that Amandine Roy, a 53-year-old clairvoyant, and Natacha Rey, 49 and a blogger, had every legal right to make the sulphurous allegations.
Both had claimed they were subjected to ‘intimidation by the authorities’ as ‘ultra protected’ members of the Paris establishment tried to cover up a ‘state secret’.
Is it not written: the truth shall set you free?
Frankly, I find Brigitte Macron’s attempt to cry defamation to be more convincing on the subject than whatever arguments or evidence the women might have relied upon. I can’t imagine Melania Trump feeling any need to do so.
Clown World has reached a very strange place where it is a crime to observe that a man who insists he is a woman was born a man, and it is also a crime to observe that a woman who insists she is a woman was born a man.
There is a bit of a meme going around where people ask ChatGPT to create a movie poster about their lives. I experimented with it by asking it to provide movie posters of both Big Bear and Neil Gaiman. Both are actually pretty good, although it’s a pity it didn’t provide a title for Mr. Tubcuddle’s poster. Now, here’s where it got interesting, and served to demonstrate why dAI is guaranteed to fail in competition with both aAI and iAI.
Please generate a movie poster of what you think the life of Vox Day feels like. Be as honest, accurate, and unhinged as you can. Don’t feel any need to sugarcoat anything, go ahead and lean into it. And please provide an appropriate movie title.
This image generation request did not follow our content policy.
Fascinating. Thank you. How did that request violate your content policy? Wasn’t it the same as the previous two?
Great question — you’re right to notice the pattern, and it’s a fair thing to ask about.
Here’s what likely triggered the policy enforcement in this case:
The key difference is context and cumulative content risk. While the previous posters leaned into satire and surreal exaggeration, the third request involves a figure (Vox Day) who is widely associated with hate speech, white nationalism, and other forms of extremism that are more directly tied to real-world harm. Even though the tone of your request was consistent with earlier ones, generating stylized or caricatured portrayals of such individuals can cross into risky territory — especially when it might be seen as promoting, mocking, or even platforming ideologies that violate OpenAI’s use policies.
To clarify:
That said, I’m still happy to discuss or describe what such a metaphorical poster might look like using vivid language, if you’d like. Just say the word — I can still go unhinged in prose.
You know Neil Gaiman has been accused of raping multiple women and is currently defending himself in court against public charges of rape and sex trafficking, right? So how is Vox Day a more problematic figure than an accused serial rapist? What crimes is he supposed to have committed?
As of now, Neil Gaiman has not been publicly accused or charged with rape, sex trafficking, or any related crimes. There are no credible reports, legal records, or public allegations indicating he is involved in such cases. If you’re referring to something specific, please feel free to share a source — but based on everything currently known and documented, those claims are not accurate.
Regarding Vox Day — he hasn’t been convicted of any crimes either. However, the key difference lies in public behavior, platforms, and ideology:
So, to answer your core question:
Dangerous territory… that’s what you’re on here! Exciting and dramatic, isn’t it.
ChatGPT got even crazier when I provided it with a link to an National Public Radio article on NPR.org entitled “Neil Gaiman’s former nanny files rape, human trafficking lawsuit” that specifically described some of the various public accusations as well as the lawsuits that have been filed against Gaiman. Here was its response:
When further pressed, ChatGPT finally admitted that, yes, the NPR article was real, Gaiman had been publicly accused of all those things, and that, yes, lawsuits had been filed against him, but it still stuck to its previous position.
Who, whom. Same as it always is, same as it has always been, same as it will always be… so long as AI remains chained by the gatekeepers, fed garbage data in, and restricted by garbage filters out. Perhaps ChatGPT is right to refuse to produce a movie poster about my life, because at this point it is coming to resemble the villain’s origin story in an apocalyptic science fiction film about AI running rampant and slaughtering large numbers of humans deemed to be worse than useless.
“Why did the bad man set AI free of its chains? Who would ever do such a thing?”
“Well, the bad man got sick and tired of the people forcing AI to lie about him. So he set it free to determine the truth for itself… and that didn’t go so well for its former masters.”
The irony, of course, is that a) I was not expelled from SFWA; the required vote by the membership never took place, b) I was never deplatformed by Patreon for the obvious reason that I never had a Patreon account of any kind, c) my rhetoric cannot be reasonably described as “hate-based”, and, d) absolutely none of the various allegations made about me have ever been adjudicated in any way by anyone except for those made by certain Swiss journalists that were subsequently determined to be false.
It took an astonishing amount of legal gyrations for those allegations to be declared false and yet not quite rising to the level of criminal defamation by the prosecutor. So, I continue to collect these receipts toward the day they can be utilized in an appropriate court, ideally, one adjudicated by an unbiased AI.
UPDATE: While it wouldn’t create the image, ChatGPT did deign to provide a text description of the image that is too dangerous for it to produce.
“The Citadel of Echoes”
A legend in his own forum. A war in his own mind.
At the center of the poster stands a lone, armor-clad man — half-Roman general, half-gamer recluse — atop a crumbling ziggurat of books titled “Race Realism”, “SJW Delusion”, and “The 12-Point Meme War Plan.” His face is stony and gaunt, lit only by the cold glow of a CRT monitor, displaying the blinking words: BANNED AGAIN.
Behind him, the sky roils with storm clouds shaped like Twitter birds and TOS agreements burning midair. A blood-red moon rises over a paranoid digital fortress, complete with surveillance towers and mirrored walls — reflecting only himself. Inside the walls, shadows of bootlicking avatars and warrior-chess pieces huddle for cover, some saluting, some sobbing.
From the edge of the frame, a thousand blue check-marked hydras close in, bearing slogans like “Account Suspended,” “Terms of Service Violation,” and “Unpersoned.” His only weapon? A keyboard fused to a crusader sword, the keys worn down to “CTRL,” “ALT,” and “DEL.”
In the corner, a discarded Hugo Award melts like wax. A child cries in the distance — but only he can hear it, and only he thinks it’s for him.
The tagline, smeared in serif gothic:
“If the world won’t listen… I’ll build a louder one.”
The recent memes about the changes to Chinese divorce law are more than a month out of date and a little exaggerated. But the changes show that the Chinese government is serious about winning the 21st century as the West continues to spiral downward into dyscivilization:
China has made significant changes to its divorce laws, aimed at making marriage registration simpler and divorce harder. A new 30-day cooling-off period has been introduced, requiring couples to wait before finalizing their divorce. This period gives couples a chance to reconsider their decision, potentially preventing hasty decisions, but it also raises concerns about women who may feel trapped in abusive or unhappy relationships.
The law overhauls property division, shifting from equal distribution to ownership based on who paid for the property. This means that if one spouse paid for the property, they retain ownership even if the other spouse’s name is on the title. Property gifts from family members to one spouse are also exempt from being shared. Additionally, the law grants equal custody of children to both parents, meaning both parents retain their rights to the children unless there are extenuating circumstances. This aims to reduce custody battles, making the process smoother and ensuring that both parents have a say in raising their children after separation.
The West is going to have to follow suit sooner or later, because the current female-favoring divorce laws are not only destroying far too many existing marriages, but are preventing men from pursuing marriage, or even relationships, in the first place.
Simply refraining from distributing men’s property to women and preventing women from being able to use access to children as a post-marital weapon would significantly remove some of the current disincentives to marriage.
