But there is no such thing as a newspaper, a magazine, a TV news channel or even a news website anymore. There is only the Web. If you want to live there, you must build a community within it.

That means doing something I hate, namely specializing. It also means creating a two-way street, like Facebook without the sludge. A safe place for locals to not only vent but connect, emphasis on the word SAFE. You’re about as safe on Facebook as you are on an unlit alleyway behind a strip club after midnight on a weekend.

Once you build a community, you can build another, but it won’t be any cheaper than the first one was. Doing this takes deep learning, expertise, and a desire to serve. The best publishers have always identified with their readers, sometimes to a ridiculous degree. Their business is creating =communities around shared needs, through unbiased journalism and a clear delineation between advertising and editorial.

Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. And who we love—what we ultimately care about, what we’re willing to sacrifice for—reveals more about our vision for humanity than all our stated intentions and proclamations. In asking who Elon loves, we’re really asking what kind of future we’re racing toward under the influence of those who share his loves and priorities.

A future shaped by Musk’s loves would be efficient, optimized, and profoundly lonely. A society built on democratic love would be messier, slower—but it would be built for people, not just progress. The choice is ours. The question is not merely academic but existential: will we surrender our future to those who love ideas more than people, or will we insist on a world shaped by more humane loves—loves that recognize both our limitations and our dignity, our need for both innovation and connection?

Perhaps it’s time to ask ourselves not just who Elon loves, but what kind of loves should be shaping our collective future.

The Democratic establishment brain was at the giant law firm Paul Weiss. They just bent the knee to Trump. Plus, tennis players revolt, and Google accidentally confesses to monopolization.

For a long time, I’ve discussed a secret center of power in America, what is known as “Big Law,” a network of law firms who serve as a shadow government for the out-of-power party.

Lawyers have always had a special place in America. They must maintain a dual loyalty, serving clients with advice and court representation, but serving the public as officers of the court. There’s a dense ethical code lawyers must maintain. For instance, they can’t help their clients break the law, and they can’t switch sides in a dispute

On my AI courses, I don’t just teach how to build AI; I emphasize understanding what it is. Most importantly, I explore the what and the why. My goal is to leave no stone unturned in the minds of my students and executives, fostering a comprehensive awareness of AI’s potential and its pitfalls.

Crucially, this involves cultivating widespread AI literacy, empowering individuals to responsibly understand, build, and engage with these transformative technologies. Our exploration centers on developing applications that enhance societal well-being, moving beyond the pursuit of mere profit. My AI app for a major bank, designed to assist individuals with vision impairment, exemplifies this philosophy.

This focus on ethical development and human-centered design underscores my conviction that the future of AI depends on our ability to move beyond simplistic narratives and embrace a nuanced understanding of its potential. Whatever we may think of AI, and I have many conflicting thoughts, it is certain that it will foretell our future, so we must learn to shape it and rebuild our humane qualities.

Trump’s policies attack his own base — but who will tell them?

Donald Trump is often described as a “populist.” Yet his administration is stuffed with wealthy men who are clueless about how the other 99.99 percent lives, while his policies involve undermining the working class while enabling wealthy tax cheats.

What is true is that many working-class voters supported Trump last year because they believed that he was on their side. And that disconnect between perceptions and reality ought to be at the heart of any discussion of what Democrats should do now.

Right now the central front in the assault on the working class is Social Security, which Elon Musk, unable to admit error, keeps insisting is riddled with fraud. The DOGE-bullied Social Security Administration has already announced that those applying for benefits or trying to change where their benefits are deposited will need to verify their identity either online or in person — a huge, sometimes impossible burden on the elderly, often disabled Americans who need those benefits most. And with staff cuts and massive DOGE disruption, it seems increasingly likely that some benefits just won’t arrive as scheduled.

Not because we won’t have elections.

But because if enough people start to believe that the answer is “no,” then they won’t engage. They won’t prepare. They won’t bother. And the loss in the elections that do take place becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. (Trump sparked this precise effect in the Georgia run-offs for US Senate in January 2021).

Of course….we can’t know for sure what will happen in the coming years, let alone days and weeks. And we should be prepared for a continued parade of terrible actions by Trump and his henchmen.

Top Democrats tell us their party is in its deepest hole in nearly 50 years — and they fear things could actually get worse:

• The party has its lowest favorability ever.
• No popular national leader to help improve it.
• Insufficient numbers to stop most legislation in Congress.

• A durable minority on the Supreme Court.
• Dwindling influence over the media ecosystem, with right-leaning podcasters and social media accounts ascendant.
• Young voters are growing dramatically more conservative.
• A bad 2026 map for Senate races.
• Democratic Senate retirements could make it harder for the party to flip the House, with members tempted by statewide races.
• There are only three House Republicans in districts former Vice President Harris won in 2024, a dim sign for a Democratic surge. There were 23 eight years ago in seats Hillary Clinton won.
• And, thanks to the number of people fleeing blue states, the math for a Dem to win the presidency will just get harder in 2030.

But there is no such thing as a newspaper, a magazine, a TV news channel or even a news website anymore. There is only the Web. If you want to live there, you must build a community within it.

That means doing something I hate, namely specializing. It also means creating a two-way street, like Facebook without the sludge. A safe place for locals to not only vent but connect, emphasis on the word SAFE. You’re about as safe on Facebook as you are on an unlit alleyway behind a strip club after midnight on a weekend.

Once you build a community, you can build another, but it won’t be any cheaper than the first one was. Doing this takes deep learning, expertise, and a desire to serve. The best publishers have always identified with their readers, sometimes to a ridiculous degree. Their business is creating =communities around shared needs, through unbiased journalism and a clear delineation between advertising and editorial.

Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. And who we love—what we ultimately care about, what we’re willing to sacrifice for—reveals more about our vision for humanity than all our stated intentions and proclamations. In asking who Elon loves, we’re really asking what kind of future we’re racing toward under the influence of those who share his loves and priorities.

A future shaped by Musk’s loves would be efficient, optimized, and profoundly lonely. A society built on democratic love would be messier, slower—but it would be built for people, not just progress. The choice is ours. The question is not merely academic but existential: will we surrender our future to those who love ideas more than people, or will we insist on a world shaped by more humane loves—loves that recognize both our limitations and our dignity, our need for both innovation and connection?

Perhaps it’s time to ask ourselves not just who Elon loves, but what kind of loves should be shaping our collective future.

The Democratic establishment brain was at the giant law firm Paul Weiss. They just bent the knee to Trump. Plus, tennis players revolt, and Google accidentally confesses to monopolization.

For a long time, I’ve discussed a secret center of power in America, what is known as “Big Law,” a network of law firms who serve as a shadow government for the out-of-power party.

Lawyers have always had a special place in America. They must maintain a dual loyalty, serving clients with advice and court representation, but serving the public as officers of the court. There’s a dense ethical code lawyers must maintain. For instance, they can’t help their clients break the law, and they can’t switch sides in a dispute

On my AI courses, I don’t just teach how to build AI; I emphasize understanding what it is. Most importantly, I explore the what and the why. My goal is to leave no stone unturned in the minds of my students and executives, fostering a comprehensive awareness of AI’s potential and its pitfalls.

Crucially, this involves cultivating widespread AI literacy, empowering individuals to responsibly understand, build, and engage with these transformative technologies. Our exploration centers on developing applications that enhance societal well-being, moving beyond the pursuit of mere profit. My AI app for a major bank, designed to assist individuals with vision impairment, exemplifies this philosophy.

This focus on ethical development and human-centered design underscores my conviction that the future of AI depends on our ability to move beyond simplistic narratives and embrace a nuanced understanding of its potential. Whatever we may think of AI, and I have many conflicting thoughts, it is certain that it will foretell our future, so we must learn to shape it and rebuild our humane qualities.

But there is no such thing as a newspaper, a magazine, a TV news channel or even a news website anymore. There is only the Web. If you want to live there, you must build a community within it.

That means doing something I hate, namely specializing. It also means creating a two-way street, like Facebook without the sludge. A safe place for locals to not only vent but connect, emphasis on the word SAFE. You’re about as safe on Facebook as you are on an unlit alleyway behind a strip club after midnight on a weekend.

Once you build a community, you can build another, but it won’t be any cheaper than the first one was. Doing this takes deep learning, expertise, and a desire to serve. The best publishers have always identified with their readers, sometimes to a ridiculous degree. Their business is creating =communities around shared needs, through unbiased journalism and a clear delineation between advertising and editorial.

Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. And who we love—what we ultimately care about, what we’re willing to sacrifice for—reveals more about our vision for humanity than all our stated intentions and proclamations. In asking who Elon loves, we’re really asking what kind of future we’re racing toward under the influence of those who share his loves and priorities.

A future shaped by Musk’s loves would be efficient, optimized, and profoundly lonely. A society built on democratic love would be messier, slower—but it would be built for people, not just progress. The choice is ours. The question is not merely academic but existential: will we surrender our future to those who love ideas more than people, or will we insist on a world shaped by more humane loves—loves that recognize both our limitations and our dignity, our need for both innovation and connection?

Perhaps it’s time to ask ourselves not just who Elon loves, but what kind of loves should be shaping our collective future.

The Democratic establishment brain was at the giant law firm Paul Weiss. They just bent the knee to Trump. Plus, tennis players revolt, and Google accidentally confesses to monopolization.

For a long time, I’ve discussed a secret center of power in America, what is known as “Big Law,” a network of law firms who serve as a shadow government for the out-of-power party.

Lawyers have always had a special place in America. They must maintain a dual loyalty, serving clients with advice and court representation, but serving the public as officers of the court. There’s a dense ethical code lawyers must maintain. For instance, they can’t help their clients break the law, and they can’t switch sides in a dispute

On my AI courses, I don’t just teach how to build AI; I emphasize understanding what it is. Most importantly, I explore the what and the why. My goal is to leave no stone unturned in the minds of my students and executives, fostering a comprehensive awareness of AI’s potential and its pitfalls.

Crucially, this involves cultivating widespread AI literacy, empowering individuals to responsibly understand, build, and engage with these transformative technologies. Our exploration centers on developing applications that enhance societal well-being, moving beyond the pursuit of mere profit. My AI app for a major bank, designed to assist individuals with vision impairment, exemplifies this philosophy.

This focus on ethical development and human-centered design underscores my conviction that the future of AI depends on our ability to move beyond simplistic narratives and embrace a nuanced understanding of its potential. Whatever we may think of AI, and I have many conflicting thoughts, it is certain that it will foretell our future, so we must learn to shape it and rebuild our humane qualities.

Trump’s policies attack his own base — but who will tell them?

Donald Trump is often described as a “populist.” Yet his administration is stuffed with wealthy men who are clueless about how the other 99.99 percent lives, while his policies involve undermining the working class while enabling wealthy tax cheats.

What is true is that many working-class voters supported Trump last year because they believed that he was on their side. And that disconnect between perceptions and reality ought to be at the heart of any discussion of what Democrats should do now.

Right now the central front in the assault on the working class is Social Security, which Elon Musk, unable to admit error, keeps insisting is riddled with fraud. The DOGE-bullied Social Security Administration has already announced that those applying for benefits or trying to change where their benefits are deposited will need to verify their identity either online or in person — a huge, sometimes impossible burden on the elderly, often disabled Americans who need those benefits most. And with staff cuts and massive DOGE disruption, it seems increasingly likely that some benefits just won’t arrive as scheduled.

Not because we won’t have elections.

But because if enough people start to believe that the answer is “no,” then they won’t engage. They won’t prepare. They won’t bother. And the loss in the elections that do take place becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. (Trump sparked this precise effect in the Georgia run-offs for US Senate in January 2021).

Of course….we can’t know for sure what will happen in the coming years, let alone days and weeks. And we should be prepared for a continued parade of terrible actions by Trump and his henchmen.

Top Democrats tell us their party is in its deepest hole in nearly 50 years — and they fear things could actually get worse:

• The party has its lowest favorability ever.
• No popular national leader to help improve it.
• Insufficient numbers to stop most legislation in Congress.

• A durable minority on the Supreme Court.
• Dwindling influence over the media ecosystem, with right-leaning podcasters and social media accounts ascendant.
• Young voters are growing dramatically more conservative.
• A bad 2026 map for Senate races.
• Democratic Senate retirements could make it harder for the party to flip the House, with members tempted by statewide races.
• There are only three House Republicans in districts former Vice President Harris won in 2024, a dim sign for a Democratic surge. There were 23 eight years ago in seats Hillary Clinton won.
• And, thanks to the number of people fleeing blue states, the math for a Dem to win the presidency will just get harder in 2030.

“It’s a free county.”

How many times have you said it? Or heard it said? Children say it almost as soon as they learn to talk.

It’s an idea that is so woven into the fabric of our lives that it is for many of us—despite all the wrongs of this country’s past—perhaps the simplest possible distillation of what America is about or, at least, should be about.

At least it was.

But is it true any longer? Is it true if the government can tell a university what to teach and how? Or if that government uses its power to snatch legal residents off the streets for expressing a view it does not like? Or if leaders in Washington threaten law firms that if they do not embrace clients with certain beliefs they will be forced out of business? Or if promoting simple ideas like the merits of diversity or the importance of equity and inclusion can be banned within the government or within entities that receive funds from the government? When pictures of Americans of color or women are banned from government websites? When words are considered so dangerous that they become banned in research proposals or any documents that require the approval of a government official?