'Singularity' Author Warns That Future AI Could Pose These Threats

William Hertling, author of the “Singularity Series,” joined Glenn on today’s show to talk about the future of technology and artificial intelligence. They tackled these questions and more:

  • What will it look like when humans and smart machines are “coexisting”?
  • Will we keep losing jobs to automation?
  • When will robots be able to diagnose our illnesses and replace doctors?
  • How will the human experience change as technology advances?
  • Will we be able to “opt out” of AI?

With every upside there looks to be a downside with the advancements in AI, tell us in the comment section below whether you are excited or ready to pull the plug.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: I have been immersing myself in -- in future tech, to try to understand what is coming our way and what the -- the moral issues are of the near future.

What it means to each of us in our lives. What it means to be asked the question, am I alive?

Is this life? We have so many questions that we have to answer. And we're having trouble with just some of the basic things. And no one is really thinking about the future.

When you think about the future, and you think about robots or you think about AI, Americans generally think of the terminator. Well, that's not necessarily what's going to happen.

How do we educate our kids?

So I've been reading a lot of high-tech stuff. And in my spare time, I've been trying to read some novels. And I'm looking for the storytellers, the people who can actually tell a great story that is really based in what is coming. The -- the futurist or the -- the near future sci-fi authors, that can show us what's on the horizon.

And I found a series of books. It's called the -- the Singularity series. And I found them over the Christmas vacation. And I just last night finished the fourth one.

And they are really, really well-done. They are -- they get a little dark. But it also shows the positive side of what could be. And it was a balanced look, and a way to really understand the future that is coming and is on the horizon.

William Hertling is the author, and he joins us now. William, how are you, sir?

WILLIAM: I'm doing great. Thanks so much for having me on.

GLENN: Congratulations on a really good series.

This is self-published?

WILLIAM: Yep. It is self-published. I could not find a publisher who saw the vision of the series. But I self-published it, and people love it. So it gets the word out there.

GLENN: Yeah. You've won several awards for it, and I hope -- you know, I don't know what your sales have been like, but I hope your sales are really good. Because I -- I think it -- well, let me ask you this: What was the intent of the series for you?

WILLIAM: You know, what happened was, about ten years ago, I read two books back-to-back. One was Ray Kurzweil, The Singularity Is Near, which I know you've read as well.

GLENN: Yep.

WILLIAM: And the other one was Charles Straufman's (phonetic) Accelerometer, which is a fictional book about the singularity.

And what I really realized at that point in time was that we had the biggest set of changes that were ever going to face humanity. And they were coming. And they were in the very near future. Right? They're certainly coming in my lifetime. They're probably coming within the next ten years. And there's very little out there about that.

And as you said, most of the stories that are in media today are about these terminator-style stories. AI rises up. They take control of the machines. And we fight them in the battle. Which, of course, makes for a great movie. I would love to see the Terminator many times over, but what happens when it's not like that? What happens when it's sort of the quiet kind of AI story. And that's really what I wanted to explore. What happens when there's this new emergence of the first AI that's out there, and people realize they're being manipulated by some entity? And what do they do about it? How do they react?

GLENN: So I find this -- first of all, you lay it out so well. And the first book starts with the emergence of AI. And then moves -- I think the next book is, what? Ten years later, five years later --

WILLIAM: They're all ten years apart. Yeah. Basically explore different points of technology in the future.

GLENN: Right. So the last one is in the 2040s or in the 2050s. And it's a very different thing then than it starts out as.

WILLIAM: Yeah.

GLENN: And the thing I wanted to talk to you about is, first of all, can you just define -- because most people don't know the difference between AI, AGI, and ASI, which is really important to understand.

WILLIAM: Sure. So AI is out there today. It's any time programmers write a piece of software. Yet, instead of having a set of rules, you know, if you see this, then do that. Instead, the AI software is trained to make the decisions on its own. So AI is out there today. It's how you have self-driving cars. It's what selects the stories that you read on Facebook. It's how Google search results come about.

And AGI is the solution that artificial intelligence will become more general, right? All of the things that I mentioned, are very specific problems to be solved. How to drive a car is a very specific problem.

GLENN: So a good -- a good explanation of AI would be big blue, the chess-playing IBM robot.

It has no general intelligence. It does that.

WILLIAM: Exactly, right. And we have IBM's Watson, which is really good at making diagnoses about cancer. But you can't have a conversation about how you're feeling.

GLENN: Right.

WILLIAM: But AGI would. AGI would appear to be like a human being, conceivably. In that, it could talk and reason about a wide variety of topics, make decisions. Generally, use its intelligence to solve problems that it hasn't even seen before.

GLENN: Now, AGI can pass the Turing test?

WILLIAM: Yeah, so the Turing test is this idea that you've got a person in one room, chatting with someone in another room, and they have to decide, is that a human being, or is it a computer? And if they can't figure it out, then that is the Turing test.

And you pass the Turing test, if you can't distinguish between a computer and a person.

GLENN: How close are we to that?

WILLIAM: Well, I think we probably all have been fooled at least a couple of times when we've either gotten a phone call or made a phone call and we think that we're talking to a human being on the other end. Right? But it actually turns out that we're talking to a machine that routes our phonecall somewhere.

So, you know, we're there for a couple of sentences. But we're still pretty far away if you're going to have any meaningful conversation.

GLENN: And AGI is when the computer has the computing power of a human brain?

WILLIAM: Yeah.

GLENN: Okay. Now, that's not necessarily a scary thing. But it's what happens when you go from AGI to ASI, artificial super intelligence. And that can happen within a matter of hours. Correct?

WILLIAM: It can. There's a couple of different philosophies on that. But if you can imagine that -- think about the computer that you have today, versus the computer that you had ten years ago. Right?

It's vastly more powerful. Vastly more powerful than the one you had 20 years ago. So even if there's not these super rapid accelerations in -- in intelligence. Even if you just today had a computer that was the intelligence of a human being, you would imagine that ten years from now, it's going to be able to think about vastly more stuff. Much faster. Right?

So we could see even just taking advantage of increasing in computing power, we would get a much smarter machine. But the really dangerous, or not necessarily dangerous, but the part -- the really rapid change comes from when the AI can start making changes to itself.

So if you have today, programmers create AI. But in the future, AI can create AI. And the smarter AI gets, then in theory, the smarter the AI it can build. And that's where you can get this thing that kind of spirals out of control.

GLENN: So you get a handle on how fast this can all change, if you have an Apple i Pad 2, that was one of the top five supercomputers in 1998. Okay?

That was a top five supercomputer.

WILLIAM: Yeah.

GLENN: That's how fast technology is growing on itself.

All right. So, William, I want you to kind of outline what -- we're going to take a break, and I want you to come back and kind of outline why all of this stuff matters. What -- what is in the near future, that we're going to be wrestling with? And why people should care. When we come back.

GLENN: As you know, if you're a long-time listener of the program, I'm very fascinated with the future and what is coming. The future of tech and artificial intelligence.

William Hertling is an author and a futurist. He is the author of what's called The Singularity Series. It's a series of four novels, that kind of break it down and tell you what's coming. And break it down in an entertaining fashion. I highly recommend The Singularity Series. If you are interested in any of this, you need to start reading that, you will really enjoy that.

STU: William, I know Glenn is a big fan of your work and has been reading a lot about technology. I think a lot of people who are living their daily lives aren't as involved in this. I think a third or a half of the audience when you hear AI, don't even connect that to artificial intelligence, until you say it.

I know as a long-term NBA fan, I think Allen Iverson, honestly when I hear AI. Can you make the case, with everything going on in the world, why should people put this at the top of their priority list?

WILLIAM: Well, it's the scale of the change that's coming.

And probably the nearest thing that we're really going to see is over the next five years, we're going to see a lot more self-driving cars and a lot more automation in the workplace. So I think transportation jobs account for something like 5 percent of all jobs in the United States.

And whether you're talking about driving a car, a taxi, driving a delivery truck, all of those things are potentially going to be automated. Right? This is one of the first really big problems that AI is tackling. And AI is good at it. So AI can drive a car. And it can do a better job. It doesn't get tired. It doesn't just go out and drink before it drives, and it doesn't make mistakes.

Well, that's not quite true. They're going to make less mistakes, but they're going to make less mistakes than your typical human operator. So you know business likes to save money. And it likes to do things efficiently. And self-driving cars are going to be more cost-effective. They're going to be more efficient. So what happens to those 5 percent of the people today who have transportation jobs? Right?

This is probably going to be the biggest thing that affects us.

GLENN: I think, William, you know, that Silicon Valley had better start telling the story in a better fashion. Because as these things hit, we all know politicians on both sides, they'll just -- they'll blame somebody. They're telling everybody that I'm going to bring the jobs back.

The jobs aren't coming back. In fact, many, many more are going to be lost. Not to China, but by robotics and AI. And when that happens, you know, I can see, you know, politicians turning and saying, "It's these robot makers. It's these AI people."

WILLIAM: Yeah. Naturally. And yet, unfortunately, the AI genie is out of the bottle, right? Because we're investing in it. China is investing in it. Tech companies around the world are investing in it.

If we stop investing in it, even if we said, hey, we don't want AI, we don't like it, all that's going to do is put us at a disadvantage compared to the rest of the world. So it's not like we can simply opt out. It's not really -- we don't have that option. It's moving forward. So we need to participate in it. And we need to shape where it's going. And I think this is the reason why it's so important to me that more people understand what is AI and why it matters. Because we need to be involved in a public conversation about what we want society to look like in the future.

As we go out, if even more jobs are eliminated by AI, what does that mean? What if we don't have meaningful work for people?

GLENN: I think the thing I like about your book series is it starts out really hopeful. And it shows that, you know, this technology is not going to be something that we really are likely to refuse. Because it's going to make our life incredibly stable and easy in some ways.

And I kind of would like you to talk about a little about, you know, the stock market and the economy and war and everything else. Something that you talk about in your first novel. And show you when we come back, the good side, and then what it could turn into.

STU: So Allen Iverson is taking our transportation jobs?

GLENN: Yes, yes.

STU: Okay. That's what I got from that.

GLENN: We're talking to William Hertling. He is the author and futurist. The author of many books. His latest is The Kill Process. I'm talking to him about The Singularity Series. And the first one in there is the Avagadro Corp. And it starts out around this time. And it starts out with a tech center in Portland. And a guy is working on a program that will help everybody with their email. And all of a sudden he makes a couple of changes. And unbeknownst to him, it grows into something that is thinking and acting and changing on its own.

And, William, I would like you to take us through this. Because the first book starts out really kind of positive. Where you're looking at this -- and there's some spooky consequences -- but you're looking at it going, you know, I could see us -- I'd kind of like that. And by the end, in the fourth book, we've all been digitized. And we're in a missile, leaving the solar system because earth is lost.

A, do you think this is -- is this your prediction, or you just think this is a really kind of good story?

WILLIAM: Well, you know, I think a lot of it has the potential to be real. And I think one of the things you probably know from my reading is that I'm fairly balanced. What I see are the risks and the benefits. I think there's both.

GLENN: Yeah.

WILLIAM: I get very upset. There are so many people that are very dogmatic about artificial intelligence and the future. And they either say, hey, it's all benefits and there are no risks. Or they only talk about the risks without the benefits.

And, you know, there's a mix of both. And it's like any other technology. Right?

GLENN: We don't know.

WILLIAM: All of our smartphones -- we all find our smartphones to be indispensable. And at the same point in time, they affect us. Right? And they have negative affects. And society is different today than it was years ago, at the cost of our smartphones.

GLENN: But this is different though than anything else that we've seen like a smartphone. Because this is -- this is like, you know, an alien intelligence.

We don't have any way to predict what it's going to be like, or what it's going to do. Because it will be thinking. And it most likely will not be thinking like a human.

But can we start at the beginning, where, just give me some of the benefits that will be coming in the next, let's say, ten years that people will have a hard time saying no to.

WILLIAM: Sure. I mean, first of all, we already talked about self-driving cars, right? I think we all like to get into our car and be able to do whatever we want to do and not have to think about driving. That's going to free us up from a mundane task.

We're going to see a lot more automation in the workplace. Which means that the cost of goods and services will go down. So we'll be able to get more from less. So that will seem like an economic boom, to those of us that will afford it. Right? We will be able to enjoy more things. We'll have better experiences when we interact with AI. So today, if you have to go to the doctor, you'll wait to get a doctor's appointment. You'll go in. You'll have this rushed experience, more than likely, if you're here in the US. You'll get five minutes of their time, and you're hoping they will make the right diagnosis in the five minutes they're with you. That's going to be I think one of the really big changes over the five, ten years from now is we'll see a lot more AI-driven diagnosis.

So when you're having medical issues, you can go in, and you can talk to an AI that will be more or less indistinguishable than talking to the nurse when you walk into the doctor's office.

And by the time the doctor's sees you, there will already be a diagnosis made by the AI. And it likely will be more accurate than what the doctor would have done. And all they'll do is sign off on it.

GLENN: Yeah, I had a hard time -- until I started reading about Watson, I had a hard time believing that people would accept something from a machine. But they are so far ahead of doctors, if they're fed enough information.

They're so far ahead on, you know, predicting cancer and diagnosing cancer than people are. I think it's going to be a quick change. You're going to want to have the AI diagnose you.

WILLIAM: Right. Because that's going to be the best. Right? When we go to the doctor, we want the best. We don't want the second best.

GLENN: Right.

WILLIAM: So we're going to see a lot of that. And then, you know, ten to 15 years out -- you know, it's funny, I had a conversation with my daughter one day, and she asked, hey, Dad, when am I going to get to drive a car?

And I thought about her age, and I thought about that. And I was like, well, I'm not sure you're ever going to get to drive a car. Because where you are and when self-driving cars are coming, you may never drive a car.

And so you'll just get one, and it will take you where you want to go.

So there's going to be very -- they're both subtle and yet dramatic changes in society when you think about, hey, we're going to have a generation of people, and they will never have learned how to drive a car. Right? So their time will be free to do other things. They'll be different than we are.

GLENN: Do you see the -- you know, in your first book, you talk about, you know, AI changing, you know, the emails that are being sent and doing things on its own. And really manipulating people.

We are already at the point to where we accept the manipulation of what we see in our Facebook feed. But that's not -- there's -- there's -- that's not a machine trying to do anything, but give us what we want.

WILLIAM: Right.

GLENN: Do you see us very far away from, you know, hedge fund computers that can -- that can really manipulate the markets in a positive way or computers that can begin to manipulate for peace, as you put in your book, your first one?

WILLIAM: It's a good question. We're definitely going to see that. At a minimum, right? We can imagine that if you have an authoritarian government, they're going to distribute information to pacify people.

And that's not a good thing often. In some ways, it is. You know, if you have armed unrest, people will die. So there's a balance there. I think what we'll see is we'll just see lots of different people use technology in lots of different ways.

So maybe we don't have, you know, a hedge fund manipulating the markets in a positive way. Maybe it starts with a bunch of hackers in another country, manipulating the markets to make money. Right?

So I think we are going to see that distribution, that manipulation of information. And it's hard.

It out there now, right? There is content -- a lot of the content that you read on the web, whether it's a review of a restaurant or a business, a lot of it is generated by AI. And it's hard to tell what's AI versus a person writing a genuine review.

GLENN: Talking to William Hertling. He's an author and futurist. Author of a great series of novels called The Singularity Series. William, the -- the idea that intelligent -- not AI. Not narrow AI. But, you know, super intelligence or artificial general intelligence just kind of comes out of nowhere, as it does in your first novel, where it wasn't the intent of the programmer, is interesting to me.

I sat with a -- one of -- a bigger name from Silicon Valley, just last week. And we were talking about this. And he said, whoever controls AI, whoever gets this first is going to control the world.

He was talking to me privately about a need for almost a Manhattan Project for this. Do you see this as something that is just going to be sprung on us, or will it be taken, you know, in a lab? Intentionally?

WILLIAM: I think the odds are probably strongly biased towards in a lab. Both because they have the kind of deeper knowledge and expertise. You know, because they have the kind of raw computing power, right? So the folks at Google will have millions of times of computing power, than somebody who is outside a company like Google. So that alone -- it's like they have the computers that will have it in 15 to 20 years, right? That kind of computing power. And that makes AI a lot easier of a problem to solve.

So I think it's most likely to come out of a lab.

GLENN: If you're looking at, for instance, the lawsuit that was just filed against Google about the way they treat people with different opinions, et cetera, et cetera. My first thought is, good God, what are those people putting into the programming?

I mean, that -- that doesn't -- that doesn't work out well for people. Is there enough -- are there enough people that are concerned about what this can do and what this can be, that we have the safeguards with people?

WILLIAM: You know, I -- I really think we don't. I mean, think about the transportation system we have today and the robust set of safety mechanisms we have around it. Right?

So we want to drive from one place to another. We have a system of streets. We have laws that govern how you drive on those streets. We have traffic lights. Cars have antilock brakes. They have traction control. All these things are designed to prevent an accident.

If you get into an accident, we have all these harm reduction things. Right? We have seatbelts and airbags. After the fact, we have all this -- we have a whole system of litigation, right? We have ambulances and paramedics in the hospitals to take care of those damage results. In the future, we'll need that same sort of very robust system for AI. And we don't have anything like that today.

GLENN: And nobody is really thinking about it. Which is --

WILLIAM: Yeah, nobody is thinking about it comprehensively. And one thing you can imagine is, well, we'll wait until we have a problem, and then we'll put those safety mechanisms in place.

Well, the problem, of course, is that AI works at the speed of computers, not at the speed of people. And there's this scene in one of my books -- I'm sure you remember reading it -- where there's a character who witnesses a battle between two different AI factions.

GLENN: Yes.

WILLIAM: And the whole battle takes place, a lot of things happen between the two different AI factions, all in the time it takes the human character's adrenaline to get pumping.

And by the time he is primed and ready to fight, the battle is over. And they're into negotiations and how to resolve it, right?

GLENN: It's remarkable in reading that. That's a great understanding of -- of how fast this will -- things will move.

It's like one of the best action novels of war scenes I've ever seen. Really, really good. You know, page after page after page of stuff happening. And you get to the end, and you realize, "Oh, my gosh, this -- the human hasn't even hardly moved. He hasn't even had a chance to think about the first step that happened." And it's already over.

WILLIAM: Exactly. So this is why we need to be thinking about, how are we going to control AI? How are we going to safeguard ahead of time? We have to have these things in place, long before we actually have AI.

STU: Isn't it true though, William, that eventually some bad actor is going to be able to develop this and not put those safeguards in? And we're not going to have a choice. Eventually, the downside of this is going to affect everybody.

WILLIAM: You know, it's very true. And part of the reason why, I say, right? We can't opt out of AI. We can't not develop it. Because then we're just at a disadvantage of someone who does. And it gets even scarier as you move out. So one of the things I talk about in my third book, which is set around 2035. And I talk about neural implants. I think neural implants -- so basically a computer implanted in your brain, the purpose of which is mostly to get information in and out. Right? Both having a smartphone in our hands where we're trying to read information on the screen. We can get it directly in our head. It makes interaction much smoother, easier. And -- but it can also help tailor your brain chemistry. Right? So if you can imagine if you're someone who has depression or anxiety or a severe mental disability, that a neural implant could correct those things. You basically would be able to flip a switch and turn off depression or turn off anxiety.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: So, William, I'm unfortunately out of time. Could I ask you to come back tomorrow and talk and start there? Because that's really the third book. Start with the neuroimplants and where it kind of ends up with technology. Because it is remarkable. And in reading the real science behind it, it's real. It's real.

WILLIAM: It sure is. It's coming.

GLENN: Yeah. Could you come back maybe tomorrow?

WILLIAM: Sure. I would be happy too.

GLENN: Okay. Thank you so much, William. William, author and futurist. He is the author of The Singularity Series.

STU: You should get one of those things, Glenn. That thing logical alter your brain. William Hertling is the author of all these books. There's four of them in this series, The Singularity Series. Plus, Kill Process just came out. That's WilliamHertling.com.

Let me ask you this, Glenn, is this the write way to think about it? This comes in from Twitter, @worldofStu. To understand the difference between AI, artificial intelligence, and AGI, Artificial General Intelligence.

So if there's a self-driving car, and it's AI, you say, take me to the bar, and it says calculating route. Beginning travel.

Okay? If you say it to AGI, take me to the bar, it responds, your wife says you drink too much and my sensors say you put on a few pounds, routing to the gym.

GLENN: I have a feeling, you're exactly right.

STU: That's terrible.

A nation unravels when its shared culture is the first thing to go

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Texas now hosts Quran-first academies, Sharia-compliant housing schemes, and rapidly multiplying mosques — all part of a movement building a self-contained society apart from the country around it.

It is time to talk honestly about what is happening inside America’s rapidly growing Muslim communities. In city after city, large pockets of newcomers are choosing to build insulated enclaves rather than enter the broader American culture.

That trend is accelerating, and the longer we ignore it, the harder it becomes to address.

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world.

America has always welcomed people of every faith and people from every corner of the world, but the deal has never changed: You come here and you join the American family. You are free to honor your traditions, keep your faith, but you must embrace the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. You melt into the shared culture that allows all of us to live side by side.

Across the country, this bargain is being rejected by Islamist communities that insist on building a parallel society with its own rules, its own boundaries, and its own vision for how life should be lived.

Texas illustrates the trend. The state now has roughly 330 mosques. At least 48 of them were built in just the last 24 months. The Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex alone has around 200 Islamic centers. Houston has another hundred or so. Many of these communities have no interest in blending into American life.

This is not the same as past waves of immigration. Irish, Italian, Korean, Mexican, and every other group arrived with pride in their heritage. Still, they also raised American flags and wanted their children to be part of the country’s future. They became doctors, small-business owners, teachers, and soldiers. They wanted to be Americans.

What we are watching now is not the melting pot. It is isolation by design.

Parallel societies do not end well

More than 300 fundamentalist Islamic schools now operate full-time across the country. Many use Quran-first curricula that require students to spend hours memorizing religious texts before they ever reach math or science. In Dallas, Brighter Horizons Academy enrolls more than 1,700 students and draws federal support while operating on a social model that keeps children culturally isolated.

Then there is the Epic City project in Collin and Hunt counties — 402 acres originally designated only for Muslim buyers, with Sharia-compliant financing and a mega-mosque at the center. After public outcry and state investigations, the developers renamed it “The Meadows,” but a new sign does not erase the original intent. It is not a neighborhood. It is a parallel society.

Americans should not hesitate to say that parallel societies are dangerous. Europe tried this experiment, and the results could not be clearer. In Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, entire neighborhoods now operate under their own cultural rules, some openly hostile to Western norms. When citizens speak up, they are branded bigots for asserting a basic right: the ability to live safely in their own communities.

A crisis of confidence

While this separation widens, another crisis is unfolding at home. A recent Gallup survey shows that about 40% of American women ages 18 to 39 would leave the country permanently if given the chance. Nearly half of a rising generation — daughters, sisters, soon-to-be mothers — no longer believe this nation is worth building a future in.

And who shapes the worldview of young boys? Their mothers. If a mother no longer believes America is home, why would her child grow up ready to defend it?

As Texas goes, so goes America. And as America goes, so goes the free world. If we lose confidence in our own national identity at the same time that we allow separatist enclaves to spread unchecked, the outcome is predictable. Europe is already showing us what comes next: cultural fracture, political radicalization, and the slow death of national unity.

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Stand up and tell the truth

America welcomes Muslims. America defends their right to worship freely. A Muslim who loves the Constitution, respects the rule of law, and wants to raise a family in peace is more than welcome in America.

But an Islamist movement that rejects assimilation, builds enclaves governed by its own religious framework, and treats American law as optional is not simply another participant in our melting pot. It is a direct challenge to it. If we refuse to call this problem out out of fear of being called names, we will bear the consequences.

Europe is already feeling those consequences — rising conflict and a political class too paralyzed to admit the obvious. When people feel their culture, safety, and freedoms slipping away, they will follow anyone who promises to defend them. History has shown that over and over again.

Stand up. Speak plainly. Be unafraid. You can practice any faith in this country, but the supremacy of the Constitution and the Judeo-Christian moral framework that shaped it is non-negotiable. It is what guarantees your freedom in the first place.

If you come here and honor that foundation, welcome. If you come here to undermine it, you do not belong here.

Wake up to what is unfolding before the consequences arrive. Because when a nation refuses to say what is true, the truth eventually forces its way in — and by then, it is always too late.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Shocking: AI-written country song tops charts, sparks soul debate

VCG / Contributor | Getty Images

A machine can imitate heartbreak well enough to top the charts, but it cannot carry grief, choose courage, or hear the whisper that calls human beings to something higher.

The No. 1 country song in America right now was not written in Nashville or Texas or even L.A. It came from code. “Walk My Walk,” the AI-generated single by the AI artist Breaking Rust, hit the top spot on Billboard’s Country Digital Song Sales chart, and if you listen to it without knowing that fact, you would swear a real singer lived the pain he is describing.

Except there is no “he.” There is no lived experience. There is no soul behind the voice dominating the country music charts.

If a machine can imitate the soul, then what is the soul?

I will admit it: I enjoy some AI music. Some of it is very good. And that leaves us with a question that is no longer science fiction. If a machine can fake being human this well, what does it mean to be human?

A new world of artificial experience

This is not just about one song. We are walking straight into a technological moment that will reshape everyday life.

Elon Musk said recently that we may not even have phones in five years. Instead, we will carry a small device that listens, anticipates, and creates — a personal AI agent that knows what we want to hear before we ask. It will make the music, the news, the podcasts, the stories. We already live in digital bubbles. Soon, those bubbles might become our own private worlds.

If an algorithm can write a hit country song about hardship and perseverance without a shred of actual experience, then the deeper question becomes unavoidable: If a machine can imitate the soul, then what is the soul?

What machines can never do

A machine can produce, and soon it may produce better than we can. It can calculate faster than any human mind. It can rearrange the notes and words of a thousand human songs into something that sounds real enough to fool millions.

But it cannot care. It cannot love. It cannot choose right and wrong. It cannot forgive because it cannot be hurt. It cannot stand between a child and danger. It cannot walk through sorrow.

A machine can imitate the sound of suffering. It cannot suffer.

The difference is the soul. The divine spark. The thing God breathed into man that no code will ever have. Only humans can take pain and let it grow into compassion. Only humans can take fear and turn it into courage. Only humans can rebuild their lives after losing everything. Only humans hear the whisper inside, the divine voice that says, “Live for something greater.”

We are building artificial minds. We are not building artificial life.

Questions that define us

And as these artificial minds grow sharper, as their tools become more convincing, the right response is not panic. It is to ask the oldest and most important questions.

Who am I? Why am I here? What is the meaning of freedom? What is worth defending? What is worth sacrificing for?

That answer is not found in a lab or a server rack. It is found in that mysterious place inside each of us where reason meets faith, where suffering becomes wisdom, where God reminds us we are more than flesh and more than thought. We are not accidents. We are not circuits. We are not replaceable.

Europa Press News / Contributor | Getty Images

The miracle machines can never copy

Being human is not about what we can produce. Machines will outproduce us. That is not the question. Being human is about what we can choose. We can choose to love even when it costs us something. We can choose to sacrifice when it is not easy. We can choose to tell the truth when the world rewards lies. We can choose to stand when everyone else bows. We can create because something inside us will not rest until we do.

An AI content generator can borrow our melodies, echo our stories, and dress itself up like a human soul, but it cannot carry grief across a lifetime. It cannot forgive an enemy. It cannot experience wonder. It cannot look at a broken world and say, “I am going to build again.”

The age of machines is rising. And if we do not know who we are, we will shrink. But if we use this moment to remember what makes us human, it will help us to become better, because the one thing no algorithm will ever recreate is the miracle that we exist at all — the miracle of the human soul.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Shocking shift: America’s youth lured by the “Socialism trap”

Jeremy Weine / Stringer | Getty Images

A generation that’s lost faith in capitalism is turning to the oldest lie on earth: equality through control.

Something is breaking in America’s young people. You can feel it in every headline, every grocery bill, every young voice quietly asking if the American dream still means anything at all.

For many, the promise of America — work hard, build something that lasts, and give the next generation a better start — feels like it no longer exists. Home ownership and stability have become luxuries for a fortunate few.

Capitalism is not a perfect system. It is flawed because people are flawed, but it remains the only system that rewards creativity and effort rather than punishing them.

In that vacuum of hope, a new promise has begun to rise — one that sounds compassionate, equal, and fair. The promise of socialism.

The appeal of a broken dream

When the American dream becomes a checklist of things few can afford — a home, a car, two children, even a little peace — disappointment quickly turns to resentment. The average first-time homebuyer is now 40 years old. Debt lasts longer than marriages. The cost of living rises faster than opportunity.

For a generation that has never seen the system truly work, capitalism feels like a rigged game built to protect those already at the top.

That is where socialism finds its audience. It presents itself as fairness for the forgotten and justice for the disillusioned. It speaks softly at first, offering equality, compassion, and control disguised as care.

We are seeing that illusion play out now in New York City, where Zohran Mamdani — an open socialist — has won a major political victory. The same ideology that once hid behind euphemisms now campaigns openly throughout America’s once-great cities. And for many who feel left behind, it sounds like salvation.

But what socialism calls fairness is submission dressed as virtue. What it calls order is obedience. Once the system begins to replace personal responsibility with collective dependence, the erosion of liberty is only a matter of time.

The bridge that never ends

Socialism is not a destination; it is a bridge. Karl Marx described it as the necessary transition to communism — the scaffolding that builds the total state. Under socialism, people are taught to obey. Under communism, they forget that any other options exist.

History tells the story clearly. Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba — each promised equality and delivered misery. One hundred million lives were lost, not because socialism failed, but because it succeeded at what it was designed to do: make the state supreme and the individual expendable.

Today’s advocates insist their version will be different — democratic, modern, and kind. They often cite Sweden as an example, but Sweden’s prosperity was never born of socialism. It grew out of capitalism, self-reliance, and a shared moral culture. Now that system is cracking under the weight of bureaucracy and division.

ANGELA WEISS / Contributor | Getty Images

The real issue is not economic but moral. Socialism begins with a lie about human nature — that people exist for the collective and that the collective knows better than the individual.

This lie is contrary to the truths on which America was founded — that rights come not from government’s authority, but from God’s. Once government replaces that authority, compassion becomes control, and freedom becomes permission.

What young America deserves

Young Americans have many reasons to be frustrated. They were told to study, work hard, and follow the rules — and many did, only to find the goalposts moved again and again. But tearing down the entire house does not make it fairer; it only leaves everyone standing in the rubble.

Capitalism is not a perfect system. It is flawed because people are flawed, but it remains the only system that rewards creativity and effort rather than punishing them. The answer is not revolution but renewal — moral, cultural, and spiritual.

It means restoring honesty to markets, integrity to government, and faith to the heart of our nation. A people who forsake God will always turn to government for salvation, and that road always ends in dependency and decay.

Freedom demands something of us. It requires faith, discipline, and courage. It expects citizens to govern themselves before others govern them. That is the truth this generation deserves to hear again — that liberty is not a gift from the state but a calling from God.

Socialism always begins with promises and ends with permission. It tells you what to drive, what to say, what to believe, all in the name of fairness. But real fairness is not everyone sharing the same chains — it is everyone having the same chance.

The American dream was never about guarantees. It was about the right to try, to fail, and try again. That freedom built the most prosperous nation in history, and it can do so again if we remember that liberty is not a handout but a duty.

Socialism does not offer salvation. It requires subservience.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Rage isn’t conservatism — THIS is what true patriots stand for

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.