Sex Robots and AI --- Are We Headed for a WestWorld Future?

October 20, 2017

WRITER

After hearing about Germany’s first sex doll brothel, Glenn and Stu had some serious questions about the future of artificial intelligence on today’s show.

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

Some of them may sound crazy at this point, but as sex robots become more lifelike and AI keeps getting smarter, we should be asking these questions now.

Are we heading toward “Westworld”?

What happens when artificial intelligence starts saying it’s real?

If AI “thinks” it’s real, is a sex doll brothel a form of slavery?

How long until the U.S. has a birth rate crisis like Japan’s?

Listen to the full clip (above) for more analysis of the future of AI and sex in our society.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: We're getting to a place to where we can't talk to each other at all. I don't know if you saw -- do you remember Walter "Hawk" Newsome? He's the Black Lives Matter activist that was protesting a Trump rally? And they said, no, no. Free speech. You speak, and then we'll speak. We'll give you the microphone.

And he spoke. Well, now, Black Lives Matter is really upset. They said, he did a photo op. And he dismantled a lot of the work that our groups have been doing for F-ing years. It's unfortunate somebody who is so well-educated could represent the community from a radical perspective. He had to stoop to being tokenized by white supremacists.

Well, okay. So what are they saying?

Don't talk to anyone. Don't try to bridge any gaps at all. Don't allow them to see you as a human being.

How do we -- how do we do this? How do we do this? If we're controlled by politics and then because we're afraid of each other.

Look at what's happening in Hollywood now. How does -- how does anyone work in movies? For instance, West World. Do you remember the thing in West World that they had to sign?

If you were an actor or an actress, you had to sign a deal that said, "You will be posed in uncomfortable positions. Your body will be touching other bodies."

STU: Yeah, the talk was like, it was very invasive. And women had to sacrifice, basically give up all their rights.

GLENN: Men and women. Everybody had to sign it. How are you going to do that? How are you going to do that?

How are you going to be able to have anything in -- in Hollywood, in entertainment, even eventually in our own lives?

STU: Yeah. I don't know how you make any controversial content, at all. Listen to this. This was a tweet I saw. And it was from someone who was a woman, who went to go work for an organization. It was a content organization.

And she tweeted a part of her employment agreement.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: And she decided not to take the job. She refused to take the job because of this.

Okay? Refused a brand-new job that she wanted and applied for because of this.

This is what it said: I understand that this company is involved in the entertainment industry. I further understand that because the company's business requires a creative working environment, including exposure to offensive speech, I may be exposed to conduct and speech that openly and explicitly relates to sex, as well as race, sexual orientation, gender, national origin, religion, disability, and age.

I acknowledge that I may be privy to conversations where offensive speech, work scripts, or roles that involve nudity, sexual scenarios, racial epitaphs, suggestive gestures, profanity, and references to stereotypes is utilized. I understand and acknowledge that as part of my job, I may be exposed to speech and conduct that explicitly relates to sex, sexual orientation, gender, national origin, religion, disability, and age. And I expressly agree and represent that I do not object to being exposed to such speech and conduct and do not find it otherwise offensive and objectionable and that I'm willing to work in such an environment.

Now, how does a company -- give you an example. Schindler's List without this agreement? How does a company make any movie? How does a company make West World?

GLENN: May I boil it down? I'm listening to that, and I'm thinking to myself, "I think we should have everybody in my company sign that," because look at what we --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: We look at dead bodies. We are talking about ISIS, racism. We're talkings about all of these things.

STU: Coming up on the program today, we'll discuss the first sex doll brothel. Now, we talked about that in a meeting.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: We had to do research on it. Right?

I mean, it's not even -- this is a crazy example.

GLENN: So how do you --

STU: This was so offensive and so crazy, that she thought -- I'm going to tweet this so everybody can see the ridiculous things women have to deal with in the workplace.

Now, look, if you don't want to deal with that, I think that's understandable. Like, I wouldn't want to go work at a porn film manufacturer, because it's just not what I want to do with my life. But if I was going to work at the porn film manufacturer, I should sign something like this.

GLENN: Not only that, I mean, Stu, honestly, most of that applies to your job.

STU: Oh, absolutely, it does.

We're constantly discussing things when people make offensive comments in the media. We have to talk about offensive speech towards -- sometimes it's racial epithets. Sometimes it is --

GLENN: You're constantly surrounded by that stuff.

STU: Yeah. Think of every show the left loves.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

STU: Think of Veep or Breaking Bad. Or any piece of content that pushes the envelope in any way. The View, for example. I mean, again, literally all programming would be in this world. And I guess that you could say -- as a person, that doesn't mean you can be harassed and assaulted in the workplace. That's not what this says.

You're working in an environment where these things are discussed. And you have to be able to, as a company, if you're going to produce this content, you have to be able to say to your employees, look, you're going to hear some things that are offensive, and if you're so sensitive on this stuff that it bothers you, you probably shouldn't work --

GLENN: So here's the real solution: The real solution is, that should not be signed by women or men. That should be signed by infants with their footprint. Welcome to the world. You're going to be surrounded by nincompoops and offensive things.

(chuckling)

GLENN: So Harvey Weinstein is not doing well in sex rehab, apparently.

STU: Oh, no.

GLENN: He volunteered to go to rehab. And according to people, I guess in the facility --

STU: Oh, no. This is -- I thought he was going to do really well with this. And you're really ruining my day so far.

GLENN: One source says in one group therapy session, Harvey arrived 15 minutes late. He launched into a speech about how this was all a conspiracy against him. Then he fell asleep in his chair. He woke up by the ringing of his smuggled mobile phone, which is banned at the facility. He was jolted awake, jumped up, took the call and ran out of the room.

He -- another source close to Weinstein says he is no longer joining group sessions for, quote, obvious reasons. He insists that he never raped or assaulted anyone. And all of the encounters were consensual. He realized he acted like a hole of some sort and insisted that he's not a rapist. He does have his phone. When he's in therapy, he has to give to someone else. The characterization of what he said, what happened in the group session is not true.

I don't believe it. So I don't know if you saw the chauffeur. You know how all these stories end, where he was like, the chauffeur will take you home. My driver will take you home. Get out.

STU: Get out.

GLENN: Get out. Okay?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: So this has come from his French chauffeur, the man who ferried Weinstein around when he was over in Cannes or in France.

He said, Weinstein beat him when he took to meet a prostitute that didn't show up. The alleged beating put him out of commission for four days. He went crazy and hit me. At that moment, there was no question, I would never work for him again. He did try to sue him for damages. But the local prosecutor in the town dismissed the charges.

He said, the women would enter the car with tears in their eyes. He said, I felt like driving poor innocent people. Innocent girls. Taking them to the wolves mouth. I could not tell them where you put your feet, it's dangerous.

He would -- I guess, you know, he would meet people in his hotel room, and he would have these women driven to him. He said, the one that marked me the most was a girl who was a fan of him, who loved him, who followed him for years. She gave her body, her soul, she gave everything to this man because he promised to make castings and make a film that was never shot.

He said, he would demand that the driver would leave him alone with the woman. And he said, I would often find traces of illicit products strung about.

I don't know what that means.

STU: Drugs, maybe. The nickname among the locals in Cannes for Harvey became the pig.

GLENN: The nickname among the locals in Cannes for Harvey became "the pig." One housekeeper at The Majestic Hotel where he stayed, said, oh, him. Yeah -- love this -- oh, him. He was the ugly one who thought he was God.

STU: That's -- that's actually on his business card: The ugly one who thinks he's God.

GLENN: He was very bossy. Men like George Clooney or Brad Pitt, they were such lovely men and so handsome, but not him. He was just a mean pig.

STU: It's interesting. This is sort of the reverse of the Vegas shooting story. In that, with Vegas, it's like, no one had any idea this guy was doing anything like this. There's no motive. There's no background. No trail. Nothing.

This is like literally everyone who has ever met the guy thought he was doing something like this. They may have not known the extent. They may not have known he was committing crimes. But everyone seemed to know this guy was a complete dirtbag. And people like that didn't say anything.

GLENN: Well, Quentin Tarantino came out and said he knew a lot more than -- he said, "I should have said something."

STU: Yeah, and he did a lot of movies with him.

GLENN: Yeah, all of his big movies.

STU: Yeah. All his big stuff.

He said, I knew enough to do more than I did. There was more to it than just normal rumors, than normal gospel. It wasn't secondhand. I knew he did a couple of these things.

I wish I had taken responsibility for what I had heard. If I had done the work I should have done then, I would have not worked with him anymore.

He was dating Mira Sorvino after Weinstein.

GLENN: And I guess Brad Pitt did know. Because Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt confronted him. So Brad Pitt did say something to Harvey Weinstein, just for the Angelina stuff.

STU: Yeah. And Quentin said basically he was dating her, and he knew Harvey wouldn't violate his relationship. So he thought she was protected, and he just brushed it off.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. So a guy, instead of going and stopping the other guy, he's just like, "Don't worry. You're under my umbrella now."

That's bad.

STU: Yeah. Not -- it's not a good look.

GLENN: You know, I thought of this last night. All these people who are now living with the shame -- and they're going to convince themselves that they had nothing they could do. Because that's what happened.

I mean, if you look at -- if you look at the Germans, the Germans that were involved and did nothing, you know, they all convinced themselves, eh, there was nothing we could do. And maybe not. But they had to live a life of shame.

And these people are living a life of shame. They're going to be tormented in their own head, because they know. They know they didn't rise to the occasion.

And so the question that we should all be asking ourself now is -- because I really believe, tough times just aren't sprung on you. It's not like everything is great and the next day it sucks and you're living under Hitler. It happens slowly. And you have opportunities to stop that slide all the way along. But society -- you know, it's in our Declaration of Independence. People are more likely to live with tyrants, than they are to upset the applecart. Now, that's obviously butchering the Declaration of Independence. But you're more likely to just go along with it.

STU: There wasn't an applecart reference in the Declaration of Independence. Are you sure about that?

GLENN: No, there was not. Applecarts, they're racist. I mean, it's human nature to just go along and let it slide.

And if you don't prepare yourself to stand up in in the easy times. He might have thought that was really hard. But he's now looking at that and going, jeez, that was easy. I should have done that. I should have done that.

Don't put yourself in a position to where you're ever having to say, I should have done X, Y, or Z. Do it. Do it. Don't live with the regret. And it's a muscle. Courage is a muscle.

If you're not exercising it in the smallest of ways, telling your kid what you should be telling your kid, telling your spouse what you should be telling your spouse, saying something to somebody that is important, that is hard for them to hear, but you should say it. If you aren't exercising that muscle of courage at the smallest, most personal level, you will never be able to stand when it really counts.

Washington Post EXPOSED: How Watergate editors almost published a fake Pulitzer Prize-winning story

Episode 6 of Glenn’s new history podcast series The Beck Story releases this Saturday.

This latest installment explores the history of Left-wing bias in mainstream media. Like every episode of this series, episode 6 is jam-packed with historical detail, but you can’t squeeze in every story, so some inevitably get cut from the final version. Part of this episode involves the late Ben Bradlee, who was the legendary editor of the Washington Post. Bradlee is legendary mostly because of the Watergate investigation that was conducted on his watch by two young reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Bradlee, Woodward, and Bernstein became celebrities after the release of the book and movie based on their investigation called All the President’s Men.

But there is another true story about the Washington Post that you probably won’t see any time soon at a theater near you.

In 1980, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee wanted to expand the Post’s readership in the black community. The paper made an effort to hire more minority journalists, like Janet Cooke, a black female reporter from Ohio. Cooke was an aggressive reporter and a good writer. She was a fast-rising star on a staff already full of stars. The Post had a very competitive environment and Cooke desperately wanted to win a Pulitzer Prize.

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

When Cooke was asked to work on a story about the D.C. area’s growing heroin problem, she saw her chance to win that Pulitzer. As she interviewed people in black neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the heroin epidemic, she was appalled to learn that even some children were heroin addicts. When she learned about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy, she knew she had her hook. His heartbreaking story would surely be her ticket to a Pulitzer.

Cooke wrote her feature story, titling it, “Jimmy’s World.” It blew away her editors at the Post, including Bob Woodward, who by then was Assistant Managing Editor. “Jimmy’s World” would be a front-page story:

'Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict,' Cooke’s story began, 'a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms. He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life – clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5.'

Readers were hooked. And outraged. The mayor’s office instructed the police to immediately search for Jimmy and get him medical treatment. But no one was able to locate Jimmy. Cooke wasn’t surprised. She told her editors at the Post that she had only been able to interview Jimmy and his mother by promising them anonymity. She also revealed that the mother’s boyfriend had threatened Cooke’s life if the police discovered Jimmy’s whereabouts.

A few months later, Cooke’s hard work paid off and her dream came true – her story was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Cooke had to submit some autobiographical information to the Prize committee, but there was a slight snag. The committee contacted the Post when they couldn’t verify that Cooke had graduated magna cum laude from Vassar College. Turns out she only attended Vassar her freshman year. She actually graduated from the University of Toledo with a B.A. degree, not with a master’s degree as she told the Pulitzer committee.

Cooke’s editors summoned her for an explanation. Unfortunately for Cooke and the Washington Post, her resume flubs were the least of her lies. After hours of grilling, Cooke finally confessed that “Jimmy’s World” was entirely made up. Jimmy did not exist.

The Pulitzer committee withdrew its prize and Cooke resigned in shame. The Washington Post, the paper that uncovered Watergate – the biggest political scandal in American history – failed to even vet Cooke’s resume. Then it published a front-page, Pulitzer Prize-winning feature story that was 100 percent made up.

Remarkably, neither Ben Bradlee nor Bob Woodward resigned over the incident. It was a different time, but also, the halo of All the President’s Men probably saved them.

Don’t miss the first five episodes of The Beck Story, which are available now. And look for Episode 6 this Saturday, wherever you get your podcasts.

UPDATED: 5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and one who hasn't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

UPDATED: Former President Barack Obama: ENDORSED

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

UPDATED: On Friday, July 26th Barack and Michelle Obama officially threw their support behind Harris over a phone call with the current VP:

“We called to say, Michelle and I couldn’t be prouder to endorse you and do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office.”

The fact that it took nearly a week for the former president to endorse Kamala, along with his original statement, gives the endorsement a begrudging tone.

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Glenn's Show Prep