I tried feeding Midjourney (and sometimes DALL-E) lines from country songs with no context to see what I'd get. No context was provided, only the lyric.

Ok, after this week of First Amendment threats from the administration (and it's only Tuesday!), the government should start paying @TheFIREorg overtime.

Looks like Colorado’s AI law SB24-205 is on pause for now, and so is xAI’s lawsuit challenging it. On Friday, the parties jointly agreed to suspend all case deadlines while Colorado works through potential changes to the law. Enforcement is also on hold during this process. A state working group has proposed amendments to SB 24-205, and the legislature now has time to consider those changes. Depending on what happens next, and whether revisions address the constitutional concerns raised, this case could resume later. As we’ve repeatedly said, Colorado’s law has major First Amendment problems, including how the law defines "algorithmic discrimination.” In its current form, AI developers are at risk of punishment for outputs the state deems discriminatory, while carving out exceptions for outputs that “increase diversity or redress historical discrimination.” Functionally, that means access to the knowledge that these tools provide is at risk of being filtered through approved state messaging.

Speech being violence is one of the oldest arguments in the book. People discover that the line between speech and violence is a social construct, then decide that means they can redraw it however they like. Usually in a very convenient way.

"'Algorithmic discrimination' law threatens to do the opposite. It offers governments a way to pressure AI developers to treat contested moral, political, and empirical questions as though they had already been settled. It threatens to do to AI what speech codes did to campuses: use the language of protection to narrow the range of permissible thought." 🎯 Read every word of it 👉

BREAKING: The Department of Justice is reportedly investigating elected officials for criticizing the administration’s immigration enforcement operations. If this is the basis for the investigation, it is blatantly unconstitutional and intolerable in a free society. The right to condemn government action without fear of government punishment is the foundation of the First Amendment. This would not be the first time the administration has used boundless, imaginary definitions of “obstruction” or “incitement” that have no basis in the law and run headlong into constitutional limits. The few exceptions to the First Amendment are defined by narrow, exacting standards for a reason: to prevent the government from wielding its power to squash dissent. If criticism of government policy can be rebranded as a crime, then constitutional protections become meaningless and the government becomes unaccountable. That is precisely the danger the First Amendment is meant to prevent, and it is a line no administration may cross.

Pentagon’s press badge policy unites journalists by offending the Constitution thefire.org/news/pentagons-p… via @TheFIREorg by @AdGo

By @SamuelAbramsAEI, @AdGo, & me! Is Higher Education even interested in reform? eternallyradicalidea.com/p/i…

Free speech advocates expect hypocrisy. But right now it's happening at an industrial scale. My @TheFIREorg colleague @glukianoff is in today's @nytimes on the sad state of affairs.

THIS a thousand times from @TheFIREorg's @AdGo via my colleague @mkeierleber's piece about Charlie Kirk’s killing ... and the possible chill to campus speech @The74 the74million.org/article/cha… #1A

I believe in a culture of free speech, one where our first instinct in response to speech we dislike isn’t to find a way to censor it — or “cancel” the speaker — but to meet it with more speech. I believe we should defeat bad ideas with better ideas. I believe in the power of grace and forgiveness. I believe we can change people's minds. Cancel culture is the opposite of a culture of free speech. It doesn't win arguments. It doesn't change minds. It breeds silence and conformity. It ruins lives. It's a fundamentally nihilistic culture. That's why I dread this part of the tragedy cycle: When people whose hearts are broken seek retribution against those whose hearts are not, who may even welcome the tragedy. I understand the instinct to cancel. Trust me, I do. But it doesn't create the culture I want for myself and my family. That's why I'll continue to advocate for a culture of free speech even in difficult times like these. I will continue to ascribe to the belief, perhaps misplaced, that every idea is provisional. That every person is a work in progress. That people can change their minds. And that through the power of words — not coercion or violence — I can help them.

@rshibley @TheFIREorg @Kasparov63 @whignewtons @DavidAFrench @sarahemclaugh @AdGo @DavidAFrench

It’s great to see us acknowledged for our dogged commitment to nonpartisan free speech defense, but this is who we’ve always been. And you won't find a group of more principled & talented people than what we have at @theFIREorg. I could not be prouder of them.