Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Will Future Artificial Intelligence Be Able to Frame You for Crimes?

October 13, 2017
Staff

WRITER

If you aren’t yet at Elon Musk’s level of being nervous about artificial intelligence, this peek into the future might get you there.

On today’s show, Glenn read an email from a friend in the tech industry theorizing what AI of the future will be able to do. AI that can mimic voices and recognize people not only by their faces but also by their body movements is already in the works. What’s coming next?

“Imagine AI … being able to identify a perfect stacked, ranked list of every person in the country who works against whatever your agenda is,” Glenn said. “Then imagine that AI being able to go online and post things on the internet that sound exactly like you.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So I had a friend write to me, just this morning. And he said, Glenn, I was listening to your show yesterday. And he said -- let me see if I have this. I'm paraphrasing here. You talk about AI killing us all.

I know that's a go-to line a lot of tech people take with AI. But the thing I want to get across to you, is that's not the worst thing AI could do.

STU: Wait.

GLENN: Yeah, okay.

STU: You're talking about artificial intelligence could kill us all, and that he says not the worse that it could do?

GLENN: This is a guy who is in Silicon Valley, very high levels. And has -- he writes to me from time to time. And he'll say, hey, you've got this wrong, or you should pay attention to this. Or, hey, have you seen what people are working on over here? So he'll write to me from time to time. I -- think -- I'm not sure if I've ever met him. Maybe I met him once, years ago. But I'm not sure if I've ever met him. And he's written me for years. Just for years.

And I really respect him. He has a very sharp, sharp mind. And he's never asked for a meeting before.

And he wrote me last week, and he said, AI is starting to take a very scary turn. And I -- I need to meet with you.

And I said, will you come on the air and talk to me?

And he's like, God, no. No. But you need to know. And I need to make you aware of what is happening with AI.

So he says, you know, AI killing us all may not be the worse thing.

Well, what could possibly be worse? Stu, listen to this.

Imagine AI, current AI, not some AI in the future, being able to identify a perfect stacked, ranked list of every person in the country who works against whatever your agenda is from top to bottom.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Let me say that again. Imagine AI, current AI, not some AI in the future, being able to identify a perfect stacked, ranked list of every person in the country who works against whatever your agenda is from top to bottom.

Don't give this on camera, please. Then imagine that AI being able to go online and being able to post things on the internet that sound exactly like you.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: He hasn't even started. Then imagine AI being able to go online and post things on the internet that sound exactly like you, writing in your voice perfectly. Imagine AI can call people on the phone and sound exactly like you, can appear in videos, surveillance cameras, photos, looking exactly like you. Walking exactly like you.

Imagine an AI that is able to see everything that you do and then determine what the best way is to frame you for something you didn't do. Then build the evidence against you perfectly to the point that you could never defend yourself in court. Imagine an AI that can orchestrate a pile of real blackmail evidence against you, from things that you actually have done in your life, then tell the owner how to present it to you, to make you completely snap, based on your current medical and mental state.

Imagine an AI that makes it so you have no idea what is real and what is fake.

Glenn, this is the kind of thing that I'm talking about. And I can show you actual evidence of this happening now. You need to see it.

Yeah, AI can kill me. Don't do me any favors. The worst concept is what AI can do in the hands of the wrong person or agency or political party or nation or nation state. You've talked in the past about not being able to believe your eyes. We're there. That future is now.

Holy mother.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: You do not want my friends.

STU: No.

GLENN: You don't want my friends. I don't sleep well.

STU: Most people just email me to congratulate me about the Eagles win last night.

GLENN: I know. I know.

STU: And that, I think, ties into the situation with -- with Russia. And the media has done such a job on trying to make this all about Donald Trump. The idea that a foreign power with almost unlimited resources could harvest and harness that type of technology, to utilize it against somebody here or their enemies, is frightening.

GLENN: Have you heard what Vladimir Putin says about AI? Have you heard his latest statement in the last month?

STU: I don't think so.

GLENN: In the last month or so, he came out and he said, this is the final war. This is it. Whoever masters AI first will dominate and control everything on earth.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: And so he's pouring all of the resources of Russia into the development of AI. Because, I would imagine, he knows the same thing my friend does: The entire world changes.

This goes back, Stu, to a conversation you and I had in '97, '96, when I said to you, imagine a time when you're not going to be able to believe your own eyes. Because they'll be able to re-create you and put you in photographs and put you in videos. And it's not you. But you won't be able to believe your own eyes.

STU: Yeah. We've been talking about the Harvey Weinstein thing a lot this week. Imagine that sort of technology applied to this, to someone who didn't do it.

GLENN: Well, and imagine -- we know that AI -- we know that a year or 18 months ago, we heard AI imitate the voice of Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and I think Hillary Clinton.

STU: Hillary Clinton, yeah.

GLENN: You could tell it was a computer. But it was really close.

STU: Just -- it wasn't a consumer-facing press. Was it a university that was doing it?

GLENN: I can't remember.

STU: But it was the first attempt, right? In ten years, I mean, imagine how far they'll be --

GLENN: Imagine how far it is now.

STU: And it wasn't taking words from Barack Obama. It was actually creating from scratch his voice and then typing in whatever you wanted him to say.

GLENN: Correct. And, again, you could tell it was a computer. But it was the first attempt. Imagine that tape of Harvey Weinstein that the -- the NYPD had, that undercover tape. You could create -- especially somebody like me, who has been on television. You have all my movements. You have everything.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You could create anything. Anything.

STU: And this is one of the downsides of our society turning into 310 million individual broadcasters. Because now everybody has had videos posted of them, of almost everything they've done. We all host our own little shows on social media and feed into this. And really, if this technology develops as your friend says it does, and he's at a high level of Silicon Valley.

GLENN: You know who he is.

STU: Yeah, and if that develops that way, unimpeded, you're going to be able to make anyone say anything. And you're not going to be able to defend yourself.

GLENN: And what's frightening is the damage that is done -- imagine, you want to start World War III. You can start it. You can absolutely start it.

You want to start Civil War, show Donald Trump meeting with Vladimir Putin and -- and show him doing all kinds of wicked plans against the United States. You would have a civil war. Neither of them were in the room, that's not true. What's frightening is not what comes in ten years, but how perfected this technology may be at this point, where before everybody has it in their hands. Once everybody has it in their hands -- but until everybody recognizes that this stuff is true and exists, it's just then a conspiracy theory. And how many people will be wronged or jailed or killed? How many wars will be started? How many things will collapse because it was used and people don't know that we have that technology? Holy cow.

STU: I for one believe AI is responsible for turning the freaking frogs gay. I don't know if that's true. But that's what I believe.

GLENN: No, I don't think that is true.

STU: Oh, no, that was chemicals in the water. But who knows. All I know is the frogs, they're gay. I'll say that.

GLENN: I don't -- I definitely don't think they are. How do you know?

STU: They're totally gay frogs.

GLENN: Have you been to their clubs?

STU: Yeah, they're kind of enjoyable, to be honest.

EXCLUSIVE: Tech Ethicist reveals 5 ways to control AI NOW

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.