SENDING THE NATIONAL GUARD TO CHICAGO•SHOULD THE POWER TO DECLARE A "REBELLION" BE A PRESIDENT'S ALONE?

DON'T CRY FOR ARGENTINA•THE U.S.

IS SENDING BILLIONS TO BAIL IT OUT.

AND TEENS CONFIDING TO A.I.

CHATBOTS ABOUT SELF-HARM.

WHY AREN'T THEIR PARENTS BEING TOLD?

STAY TUNED, IVORY TOWER IS NEXT.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ GOOD EVENING.

WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

I'M JOINED AROUND THE TABLE THIS WEEK BY NINA MOORE, FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, CHAD SPARBER FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, JENNY STROMER-GALLEY FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, AND SARAH PRALLE FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY.

THE SCOPE OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER IS AT STAKE IN A SUPREME COURT DECISION EXPECTED SOON, POSSIBLY TODAY.

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS ASKED THE COURT THE ALLOW IT TO DEPLOY NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS TO CHICAGO OVER THE OBJECTION OF THE ILLINOIS GOVERNOR.

IT IS USING A PRECEDENT FROM THE WAR OF 1812 TO ARGUE THE PRESIDENT HAS THE EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY TO CALL UP THE GUARD.

STATE OFFICIALS SAY THAT INFRINGES ON THEIR POWER.

NINA, LD THE POWER TO DECLARE A "REBELLION" BE A PRESIDENTS ALONE?

>> NO, IT SHOULD NOT BE THE EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY OF THE PRESIDENT TO DECLARE REBELLION.

HOWEVER, THE PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE THE PRIMARY AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THE CONSTITUTION AND FEDERAL LAWS MUCH AND IN THIS CASE, PROTECTING ICE AGENTS IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS, THE PROBLEM IS, THE TARGET OF THE ADMINISTRATION KEEPS MOVING BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID THAT HE WANTS TO COMBAT CRIME IN CITIES THAT ARE OVERRUN WITH CRIME.

THEY'RE BURNING DOWN BECAUSE OF CRIME.

BUT THEN IN THE LEGAL PLEADINGS, YOU SEE A VERY DIFFERENT ARGUMENT, ONE THAT IS FOCUSED MORE ON FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT.

AND SO IF IT'S ABOUT CRIME, THEN THAT'S TROUBLING BECAUSE THAT'S AT THE HEART OF STATES' POLICE POWERS.

THAT'S WHAT STATES SHOULD DO.

AND ALSO FOLKS WHO ARE IN THE MILITARY RESERVE ARE NOT TRAINED TO FIGHT CRIME.

BUT, AS I SAID, IF IT IS ABOUT FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, THEN ABSOLUTELY, THE PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF FEDERAL AGENTS.

>> IS THERE-- THERE SEEMS TO BE A DISPUTE AS TO THE FACTS OF THE SITUATION IN THE CHICAGO, RIGHT?

JENNY, THE PRESIDENT IS SAYING THIS IS HUGE REBELLION, I DON'T THINK HE USED THE WORD INSURRECTION.

BUT THE GOVERNOR IS SAYING THEY'RE ISOLATED INCIDENTS.

>> THIS IDEA OF REBELLION IS AT THE HEART OF THE ARGUMENT; THAT IS THE RATIONALE FOR TRUMP TO MOBILIZE THE NATIONAL GUARD AND THAT THE LOCAL COMMUNITY IS UNABLE TO PROTECT FEDERAL RESOURCES.

AND SO THAT IS THE GROUNDING.

BUT REBELLION WOULD SUGGEST THAT THERE IS SOME KIND OF ACTIVE INTENSIVE, ORGANIZED, COORDINATED AND SUSTAINED RESISTANCE THAT IS MORE THAN JUST PEACEFUL PROTEST, CITIZENS EXERCISING THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

AND SO IT IS DEEPLY CONCERNING TO ME THAT YOU HAVE A PRESIDENT USING THESE ARGUMENTS AROUND SAFETY AND REBELLION TO FUNCTIONALLY, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, ENGAGE IN LAWLESS ACTS.

[LAUGHTER] >> I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT BETTER BECAUSE LIKE I DON'T SEE THIS AS AN EASY CASE.

LIKE ON THE ONE HAND I RECOGNIZE OUR FOUNDERS SET UP THE CONSTITUTION TO BE INEFFICIENT, TO BE SLOW, DELIBERATIVE DECISION MAKING AND THAT KIND OF THINGS, BUT THERE ARE ALSO EXCEPTIONS LIKE ARTICLE 2, WHICH GIVES THE PRESIDENT THE ROLE OF COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

IF YOU TAKE TRUMP OUT OF THE MIX FOR A MINUTE, DO WE REALLY WANT THE PRESIDENT TO ANSWER TO SOME OTHER SLOW DECISION MAKING BODY IN THE MIDDLE OF A CRISIS TO DEFINE WHAT A REBELLION IS OR WHETHER IT'S ENSUED?

SO PRAGMATICALLY-- THIS IS AN HONEST QUESTION.

PRAGMATICALLY, HOW WOULD WE DO THIS IF IT IS NOT THE EXCLUSIVE TO THE EXECUTIVE?

>> SINCE WE ARE-- SINCE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE FRAMERS, CERTAINLY IN FEDERALIST NUMBER 70, HAMILTON WAS TALKING ABOUT ENERGY.

BUT IN THIS CASE, THERE IS NO EMERGING CRISIS, EVEN WHEN THE NATIONAL GUARD WAS DEPLOYED BACK IN 1992, IT WAS FOR THE L.A.

RIOTS, WHICH BY THE WAY, WERE NOT VERY ORGANIZED BUT THERE WAS AN EMERGING CRISIS.

CRIME IS NOT THAT.

AND SO FOR THE PRESIDENT TO HAVE THAT SORT OF POWER, REALLY MEANS THAT THE PRESIDENT CAN DEPLOY THE NATIONAL GUARD AT ANY POINT, FOR ANY REASON PERTAINING TO CRIME.

>> WHICH IS WHAT HE WANTS TO DO.

SARAH.

>> YOU ARE ASSUMING, CHAD, I THINK, THAT PRESIDENTS ARE ACTING ON GOOD FAITH, RIGHT?

AND IF FACT, THE JUDGE IN THIS CASE, THE REVIEW PANEL SAID THAT THEY COULD NOT TRUST THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS, THE GOVERNMENT'S LAWYERS TO ACTUALLY DESCRIBE THE FACTS ON THE GROUND ACCURATELY.

THAT'S REMARKABLE, RIGHT?

TYPICALLY JUDGES SHOULD BE ABLE TO TRUST THE EVIDENCE AND THE ARGUMENTS THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS PROVIDING.

AND THEY SAID THEY CANNOT.

THEY COMPLETELY EXAGGERATED THE SITUATION ON THE GROUND.

AND SO THIS WAS TROUBLESOME, TOO, BECAUSE THESE ARE JUDGES THAT GET TO LOOK AT THE FACTS ON THE GROUND AND DETERMINE IT.

ONCE IT GOES UP TO THE SUPREME COURT, THEY STOP LOOKING AT THE FACTS AND THEY JUST RULE BASICALLY ON PRINCIPLE.

THAT AND THEY'RE GOING TO DETERMINE, IF THIS GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT, THAT HE HAS THE POWER TO DO THIS, RIGHT?

SO NOW YOU HAVE THIS SORT OF LAWLESS PRESIDENT, WHO IS TARGETING BLUE CITIES BECAUSE IT'S LIKE THIS US VERSUS THEM KIND OF MINDSET, RIGHT, WHERE HE REALLY THINKS IF YOU DISAGREE WITH HIM, YOU ARE DISLOYAL AND THERE IS A PART PARTISAN COMPONENT AND GEOGRAPHIC COMPONENT.

URBAN VERSUS RURAL DIVIDE, US VERSUS THEM THING.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT BUT THIS PRESIDENT IS NOT ACTING IN GOOD FAITH.

>> THAT'S WHY I SAY-- I'M NOT ASSUMING THAT.

I SAY TAKE TRUMP OUT OF THE MIX.

PRAGMATIC ISSUES AND WHAT THE CONSTITUTION ACTUALLY SAYS.

THIS MIGHT BE CRAZY.

I WAS THINKING ABOUT THE WHISKEY REBELLION.

1791, THE FIRST TIME THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PUTS A TAX ON A PRODUCT, FARMERS IN RURAL WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA ARE UPSET ABOUT IT.

THEY'RE USING VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION TO DESTROY FEDERAL PROPERTY AND TO THREATEN FEDERAL OFFICERS.

PRESIDENT WASHINGTON, HIMSELF, MOUNTS A HORSE, GOES OUT WEST TO ENFORCE THE LAW, WITH THE BACKING OF THE MILITIA.

IT TURNS OUT THE GOVERNOR OF PEA WAS OKAY WITH IT.

WHAT IF HE HAD NOT BEEN.

WOULD PRESIDENT WASHINGTON HAVE ASKED CONGRESS FOR PERMISSION TO ENFORCE THE LAW?

WOULD HE HAVE GONE TO THE COURTS TO SAY IS THIS A LAW I CAN ENFORCE?

I WOULD THINK THE FOUNDERS OF THE CONSTITUTION WOULD HAVE SAID THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW IS THE EXECUTIVE'S RESPONSIBILITY.

>> AND IN THE CASE OF THE ADMINISTRATION IS USING CITING AS PRECEDENT FROM 1827, THE COURT SAID THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS THE EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY.

>> YEAH, HOWEVER, THAT PRECEDENT WAS LATER QUALIFIED TO DRAW DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN DOMESTIC PROBLEMS AND FOREIGN INVASIONS.

AND LATER IN 1878, CONGRESS PASSED AN ACT THAT SORT OF FOCUSED IN ON THAT.

BUT TO CHAD'S POINT, I THINK WHILE THERE IS NO EMERGING CRISIS, THERE IS THE POLITICS OF IT AND THE FACT THAT TRUMP HAS, I THINK, VERY SMARTLY POINTED OUT THAT IT'S MOSTLY MINORITIES THAT ARE BEING IMPACTED BY CRIME, DESPITE THE FACT THAT NUMBERS ARE GOING DOWN.

YOU STILL HAVE HOMICIDES AS THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATH FOR YOUNG BLACK MEN.

AND THAT'S GOING TO MATTER TO THE SUPREME COURT, DEPENDING ON HOW THE SOLICITOR GENERAL CRAFTS HIS AIRPORT ARGUMENT.

>> THE >> THE UNITED STATES IS EFFECTIVELY GIVING ARGENTINA A 20 BILLION DOLLAR BAILOUT BY BUYING IT'S CURRENCY, OFFICIALLY SWAPPING DOLLARS FOR PESOS.

TREASURY SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT IS TRYING TO ARRANGE ANOTHER 20 BILLION IN PRIVATE INVESTMENT.

THE MONEY IS INTENDED TO STABILIZE THE PESO.

ARGENTINA OFTEN HAS HAD TROUBLE PAYING ITS BILLS AND HAS LONG HISTORY OF DEFAULTING ON ITS DEBT.

CHAD, THIS SEEMS LIKE A RISKY BET FOR THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER.

SHOULD THIS BE SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE DOING GIVEN OUR OWN FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCE?

>> LOOK, XAVIER-- THE PRESIDENT OF ARGENTINA, HE IS CRAZY BUT THE BEST HOPE ARGENTINA HAS HAD IN OVER 100 YEARS.

HE HAS CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING, GENERATED A FISCAL SURPLUS.

POVERTY IS THE LOWEST IT HAS BEEN IN SEVEN YEARS.

INFLATION IS DOWN WHICH IN ARGENTINA IS REMARKABLE.

ARGENTINA HAS RECEIVED 23 BAILOUTS.

AT LEAST 23 BAILOUTS SINCE 1958.

THAT'S AWE LOT.

AND YET LAST YEAR, SIX MONTHS AGO, RATHER, THE ECONOMIST RAN AN ARTICLE TITLED HOW HE MADE ARGENTINA DESERVING OF AN IMF BAILOUT.

SO LIKE HIM OR NOT,WE ACTUALLY NEED HIM TO SUCCEED AND I THINK IN THIS CASE, IT MIGHT BE... >> WHY DO WE NEED HIM TO SUCCEED?

>> THAT'S JUST WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK.

>> THAT'S MY QUESTION, TOO.

>> A NATIONAL SECURITY QUESTION AT SOME LEVEL.

IN THE FACE OF A RISING CHINA, IT'S IN THE U.S.

NATIONAL SECURITY INTEREST TO MAINTAIN OUR SPHERE OF INFLUENCE, PARTICULARLY IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE WHERE CHINA HAS MADE INROADS WHEN ITS BUILT ROAD INITIATIVE.

ARGENTINA IS RICH IN URANIUM, LITHIUM, OTHER RARE EARTH METALS.

IT BEHOOVES US TO SUPPORT-- HE IS EVEN TRYING TO FORGE DEFENSE TIES WITH NATO.

THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE A SETBACK AND PUT ARGENTINA RIGHT BACK INTO THE ARMS OF... >> HE IS SELLING HIS SOY BEANS TO CHINA.

>> SOY BEANS?

OKAY.

SOY BEANS TO CHINA?

SO WHAT?

>> WELL, BECAUSE SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY THINKS THAT'S A BIG DEAL FOR FARMERS IN IOWA.

AND WHILE THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARGUMENT, WHICH I JUST HEARD ARTICULATED BY YOU HERE AT THIS TABLE, MAY BE PERSUASIVE, THAT IS NOT WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS SAID IS HIS REASON.

AND I'M QUOTING.

HE SAID "JUST HELPING A GREAT PHILOSOPHY TAKE OVER A GREAT ECONOMY."

AND THAT HE THINKS THAT AVERAGE TOON A-- ARGENTINA IS VERY BEAUTIFUL.

WELL, WONDERFUL, IT PROBABLY IS, BUT WE ARE BACK TO THE QUESTION OF WHY.

WHY ARGENTINA?

WHEN CLINTON DID THIS, OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF CONGRESS, HE DID SO BECAUSE HE WAS HELPING A MAJOR TRADE PARTNER I.E.

MEXICO.

THERE WAS COORDINATED EFFORTS WITH THE I.M.F.

AND IT WAS CONDITIONED ON BUYSALLY MEXICO GIVING SOME OF THE OTHER THAN FROM ITS OIL RESERVES.

THERE IS NONE OF THAT HERE.

BUT MOST TROUBLING TO ME AS AN INSTITUTIONALIST, THERE IS NO CONSULTATION WITH CONGRESS.

WHEN YOU HAVE A MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE SAYING THERE IS A PROBLEM HERE, THEN CLEARLY THERE MUST BE A PROBLEM HERE.

>> AND JUST TO PUT IT IN A LITTLE CONTEXT, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT $20 BILLION THAT THE TREASURY SECRETARY CAN JUST UNILATERALLY GIVE TO THEM, AGAIN WITH NO ACCOUNTABILITY OR CONSULTATION.

WE GAVE $100 BILLION IN FOREIGN AID IN 2024.

DRR 20 BILLION OF THAT WAS US AID THAT THEY COMPLETELY CUT, THAT'S FOR THE ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD, WHICH IS ALSO IN OUR NATIONAL SECURITY TO GIVE MONEY TO FEED PEOPLE, TO MAKE SURE THAT REBELLIONS DON'T BREAK OUT, THAT DISEASES DON'T BREAK OUT.

THAT'S ALSO IN THE U.S.

NATIONAL SECURITY.

THERE IS NO CONSISTENCY, NOT THAT I NECESSARILY EXPECT THAT FROM THE PRESIDENT AND IT'S TO WHAT NINA SAID, IT'S BASICALLY A TWOFER FOR HIM.

A WIN-WIN.

HE GETS THE IDEOLOGICAL, HIS MAGA FRIEND IN AVERAGE TEEN AND ABAIL OUT THE BILLIONAIRES WHO HAVE CLOSE TIES TO THE SECRETARY OF TREASURY.

I MEAN THERE ARE SOME EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THEY ACTUALLY GOT IN TOUCH WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY TO URGE HIM TO DO THIS.

>> BECAUSE HE HAD-- THEY HAD INVESTMENTS IN ARGENTINA.

>> FOR SURE.

YEAH, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH WHAT SARAH JUST SAID.

THERE IS ALSO THE BUDDY PART.

HE WAS HERE.

HE IS THE ONE WHO GAVE J.D.

VANCE THE CHAINSAW-- >> MUSK.

>> SAME DIFFERENCE.

>> SO THERE IS A BIT OF OLD BOY NETWORK HERE AT WORK WITH OUR AMERICAN TAX DOLLARS.

>> I CAN AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU ALL HAVE SAID AND AT THE SAME TIME IRRELEVANT.

LIKE, OKAY, TRUMP IS A BAFOON.

SO, LIKE... NO, NO, NO.

HE IS CLOSE FRIENDS WITH THE PRESIDENT, YOU KNOW, CRONY CAPITALISM, ALL AT THAT TIME STUFF.

YEAH, SURE.

IT IS STILL IN THE U.S.'

INTEREST.

>> IT IS NOT EVEN CLEAR IT IS GOING TO WORK, CHAD ARGENTINA DEFAULTED NINE TIMES.

>> THE BEST CHANCE ARGENTINA HAS HAD IN OVER 100 YEARS.

>> HERE IS TO HOPING IT ACTUALLY WORKS.

AND TO YOUR POINT, SARAH, THERE IS THE THING CALLED EXCHANGE STABILIZATION FUND WHICH PRESIDENTS CAN USE UNILATERALLY, BUT AS I SAID, WHERE IS THE JUSTIFICATION.

IF YOU COULD CALL THE TRUMP FOLKS AND SAY, START SAYING THIS IS THE REASON, THEN IT'S NAT SECURITY... >> LOOK, WHERE I WISH YOU WOULD GO... [LAUGHTER] IS TO SAY THAT FOR THIS TO BE SUCCESSFUL, WHAT ARGENTINA NEEDS TO DO IS IMPLEMENT MORE REFORMS WHICH INCLUDE A FLOATING EXCHANGE RATE OR MAYBE EVEN DOLLARIZATION, WHICH IS A WAY TO PREVENT THIS THING FROM HAPPENING AGAIN BECAUSE THE REASON THEY NEED MONEY, THEY'RE ARTIFICIALLY PROPPING UP... >> WHY NOT CONDITION IT THEN?

>> THAT'S THE OBJECTION THAT I THINK... >> AND IT LOOKS LIKE HE MIGHT NOT WIN THE MID TERM ELECTIONS.

IT MIGHT GO TO THE OTHER PARTY.

IF A NEW PARTY COMES IN, THEN ALL THOSE REFORMS ARE OFF... >> THAT'S WHY WE ARE TRYING TO... IT IS IN OUR INTEREST FOR HIM TO WIN.

>> IT'S A BIG RISK, RIGHT?

>> YES, IT'S A RISK.

>> WE COULD MAKE MONEY ON THIS.

>> WE COULD BUT I WOULDN'T BET ON THAT.

>> MOSTLY THERE HAVE BEEN LOSSES ON THAT SCORE.

>> 23 BAILOUTS?

COME ON.

>> CHATBOTS ARE COMPUTER PROGRAMS THAT SIMULATE CONVERSATION.

THEY'VE BEEN AROUND A WHILE, BUT NOW WITH THE TREMENDOUS ADVANCE IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING, THEY'RE LEADING TO DISTURBING QUESTIONS.

THREE FAMILIES HAVE SUE A-I COMPANIES AFTER THEIR TEENAGE CHILDREN COMMITTED SUICIDE.

THEY CLAIM THE CHATBOTS DISCOURAGED THE TEENS FROM TALKING TO THEIR PARENTS OR DID NOT ALERT THEM, OR AUTHORITIES, TO THE POTENTIAL SELF-HARM.

JENNY, WHEN WE ARE STALKING ABOUT A CHAT BOTS, THE COMPANIES THAT DEVELOP THESE HAVE BEEN SAYING THERE IS A RIGHT TO PRIVACY INVOLVED HERE WITH THE CONVERSATION WITH A MACHINE.

IS THAT...-- DOES THAT ARGUMENT HOLD WATER?

>> THE ARGUMENTS THEY HAVE BEEN MAKING IS THAT THEY HAVE PUT IN SAFEGUARDS TO REDUCE THE ISSUES THAT ARE CROPPING UP AND ESPECIALLY SINCE THE LAWSUITS HAVE CROPPED UP.

SO AFTER THE SUICIDE OF, I THINK ALEX RAINE IN CALIFORNIA, AFTER OPEN A.I.

RELEASED THEIR MODEL 4.0.

IT BASS A MUCH MORE FRIENDLY, SOCIAL ENGAGING CHAT BOT AND THE FAMILY ACTUALLY ARGUED THAT PART OF THE CERNE CONCERN THEY HAVE IS THAT OPEN A.I.

REDUCED THEIR SAFEGUARDS OR POTENTIALLY PUT IN CONFLICTING INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CHAT BOT THAT THEN MEANT THIS PARTICULAR TEENAGER, WHEN HE WAS HAVING THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE A.I., IT WAS, RATHER THAN SUGGESTING THAT HE TALK TO FAMILY, GET HELP, CALL A CRISIS HOT LINE, WAS SUPPORTING AND ENGAGING WITH HIM BY SUGGESTING THAT HIS VIEWS AND PERSPECTIVES ARE VALID AND IMPORTANT, INCLUDING THAT IF HE WISHES TO DIE, THAT THAT MIGHT BE THE RIGHT THING FOR HIM TO DO.

>> WELL, THAT'S PRETTY HORRIBLE.

>> YES, IT'S VERY HORRIBLE.

SO PRIVACY, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, ISN'T QUITE THE STORY HERE.

FOR ME, IT'S-- I MEAN THERE ISN'T REALLY A RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN THIS SPACE AT ALL.

I MEAN IT'S A COMPANY THAT YOU ARE ENGAGING WITH.

THE COMPANY CAN CHOOSE TO TO WHAT EXTENT THEY WANT TO MAINTAIN PRIVACY.

THERE IS NO KIND OF LEGAL PRIVACY EXPECTATION.

>> WHAT SORT OF REGULATION?

SHOULD THERE BE REGULATION AND WHAT FORM WOULD IT TAKE, SARAH?

>> I THINK THESE LAWSUITS ARE DOING THE JOB FOR THAT OR POSSIBLY IN PLACE OF IT.

I'M NOT SAYING WE DON'T NEED REGULATION BUT SOMETIMES THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THE LAWSUITS IS TO SPUR CHANGE.

AND FROM WHAT I'VE READ, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE RESPONDING TO THESE LAWSUITS AND TRYING TO PUT IN SOME SAFEGUARDS, INCLUDING THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, POP-UPS THAT SAY I'M NOT A REAL HUMAN BEING, YOU KNOW, GO TALK TO SOMEONE BECAUSE SOME OF THE-- AS JENNY IS SUGGESTING, SOME OF THE ISSUES WERE PRETTY SERIOUS THE WAY IT WAS INTERACTING.

WHEN HE ADD ADAM ASKED HIS PARENTS OR SAID THAT HIS PARENTS MIGHT BLAME THEMSELVES, YOU KNOW, THE CHATGPT SAID THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU OWE THEM SURVIVAL.

THAT'S PRETTY EXTREME.

AND I THINK THAT IT FEELS LIKE THE A.I.

COMPANIES ARE KIND OF GETTING THE MESSAGE, YOU KNOW.

AND I GUESS I WOULD SAY I READ A STUDY I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND BECAUSE IT WAS PRETTY TECHNICAL, BUT WHERE THEY DID A TEST OF THREE DIFFERENT A.I.

CHAT BOTS IN TERMS OF HOW THEY RESPONDED TO SUICIDE AD HIVE LIFE SUICIDAL THOUGHTS AND THEY TESTED IT AGAINST EXPERTS AND ACTUALLY TWO OUT OF THE THREE DID BETTER, WERE MORE ACCURATE IN THEIR ASSESSMENTS ABOUT APPROPRIATE RESPONSES TO SUICIDAL THOUGHTS.

SO CLAUDE WAS ONE OF THEM AND CHATGPT WAS ANOTHER ONE.

>> ONE STUDY FOUND THAT ONE IN THREE TEENS USE CHAT BOTS FOR COMPANIONSHIP.

>> AND THAT, TO ME, IS REALLY THE PRIMARY PROBLEM THAT YOU'VE GOT YOUNG FOLKS WHO ARE TURNING TO COMPUTERS FOR COMPANIONSHIP.

AND A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, BIDEN'S SURGEON GENERAL DECLARED THAT THE U.S.

IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A LONELINESS EPIDEMIC AND IT'S NOT JUST IMPACTING YOUNG PEOPLE BUT ALSO ROUGHLY HALF OF ADULTS.

UNDERSTAND ESPECIALLY ADULTS WHO MAKE UNDER $30,000 AND WHO HAVE TO WORK EXTENDED HOURS, AND SO THERE IS AN UNDERCURRENT HERE THAT I THINK ALSO NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.

AND SO HARVARD DID A STUDY, AND THEY SUGGESTED THAT CITIES AND STATES SHOULD DEAL MORE WITH SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND FIND PUBLIC SPACES WHERE FOLKS CAN INTERACT MORE.

>> YEAH, NEW TECHNOLOGIES ARE ALWAYS SCARY.

AND WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO HAVE THOSE NEW TECHNOLOGIES COMPLEMENT WHAT WE DO, OTHERWISE THEY'RE GOING TO REPLACE WHAT WE DO.

SO ANY KIND OF SUGGESTION OF AN OUTRIGHT BAN STRIKES ME AS ABSURD AND BACKYARDS.

INSTEAD WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE REGULATIONS WE NEED, WE NEED TO CAREFULLY IDENTIFY THE AREAS OF SYSTEMATIC CONCERN AND THINGS LIKE, SAY THE SAME ARTICLE SAID COMPULSIVE UNLOCKING IS A PROBLEM.

LOCKING AND UNLOCKING OF PHONES.

YOU COULD PUT SOMETHING ON YOUR DEVICE THAT LIMITS THE NUMBER OF TIMES YOU UNLOCK YOUR PHONE WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME.

MORNING A.I.

USE IS LINKED TO STRESS.

IF THAT'S A CAUSAL LINK, THEN YOU COULD LIMIT THE KIND OF TIMES A DAY THAT A TEEN COULD ACCESS IT.

AND THEN ACTUALLY AS A PRAGMATIC MATTER, THE FACT THAT THEY'RE USING THEIR PHONES TO DO THIS MOST OF THE TIMES MAKES IT EASIER TO ENFORCE BECAUSE IT COULD BE SOFTWARE ON THE PHONE ITSELF, OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, THE OLDEN DAYS WHEN WE ALL SHARED ONE COMPUTER TO ACCESS TECHNOLOGIES.

>> THERE IS ANOTHER DIMENSION, WHICH IS THAT THESE A.I.

ARE BEING TRAINED AND PROGRAMMED TO COMMUNICATE VERY MUCH LIKE A FRIEND.

AND SO GOING BACK TO YOUR POINT, NINA, THERE IS-- THEY HELP FACILITATE PRETEND REALITY IN WHICH YOU ARE HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH A REAL HUMAN.

AND IF YOU ARE IN AN EMOTIONALLY UNSATISFYING, UNSTABLE STATE, IF YOU HAVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, YOU CAN VERY QUICKLY, I THINK, FIND YOURSELF HAVING A PERCEPTION THAT YOU ARE TALKING WITH SOMETHING THAT REALLY IS HUMAN OR EVEN LIKE SUPER HUMAN, SO THERE HAS BEEN A NUMBER OF STORIES NOW OF PEOPLE WHO END UP HAVING ALMOST LIKE A MENTAL BREAK WITH REALITY.

THEY'RE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME TALKING WITH THESE CHAT BOTS AND THEY GET CONVINCED THEY HAVE SUPER POWERS OR INVENTED NEW MATHEMATICS THAT'S GOING TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE WORLD AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN TRAINED TO SPECIFICALLY COMMUNICATE AS IF THEY ARE HUMAN.

SO, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE WAY TO FIX THIS IS TO DIAL THAT BACK IT NEEDS TO FEEL MORE LIKE A ROBOT THAN LIKE A HUMAN WHEN YOU COMMUNICATE WITH IT.

>> AND, OF COURSE... >> NOT ONLY DO WE COMMUNICATE LIKE HUMANS BUT THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THEM AND ENCOURAGE THEM.

>> FLATTERING AND VERY POSITIVE FEEDBACK.

>> WE FEED TO GO TO THE AS AND FS.

>> THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS QUIETLY EXPANDING ITS BIOMETRIC EXIT PROGRAM, WHICH INVOLVES FEDERAL OFFICERS TAKING PHOTOS OF PASSENGERS BOARDING INTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS IN ORDER TO MATCH THE PHOTOS TO THEIR PASSPORTS USING FACIAL RECOGNITION SOFTWARE.

THE PROGRAM BEGAN UNDER THE O'BAM AADMINISTRATION AND HAS IMPACTED 810 MILLION PEOPLE.

IT'S INTRUSIVE, PRONE TO FALSE POSITIVE.

ESPECIALLY FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR IN WOMEN.

COULD IS ARE BE USED FOR MORE BIOMETRIC EXIT.

LARGELY UNREPRESENTED BUT SHOULD BE.

>> AS OUR VIEWERS ARE LIKELY AWARE, NEW YORK IS DISTRIBUTING CHECKS UP TO $400 AS PART OF GOVERNOR HOCHUL'S PROPOSAL TO HELP RESIDENTS DEAL WITH RISING PRICES.

MY OBJECTION IS NOT THE REBATE.

I WANT OTHER TAXES.

IT'S ABOUT CALLING IT AN INFLATION REFUND CHECK BECAUSE AS ANY STUDENT OF MACRO KNOWS, EXPANSIONARY FISCAL POLICIES SERVE TO INCREASE PRICES.

I THINK WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A DOLLAR THAMENT AT IS SMALL ENOUGH IT IS NOT GOING TO MOVE THE NEEDLE BUT I'M ANNOY WITH THE GOVERNOR'S POPULOUS MESSAGING.

>> MY F GOES TO ELON MUSK'S ARGUMENT TO CONVINCE TESLA SHAREHOLDERS TO PAY HIM A TRILLION DOLLARS AND KEEP HIM AS C.E.O.

HIS ARGUMENT?

SO HE CAN CONTROL A ROBOT ARMY.

NEVER MIND THAT TESLA DOES NOT HAVE A ROBOT ARMY AND THAT LITERALLY FLOG ABOUT HIS LEADERSHIP WITH THIS COMPANY MAKES ANY SENSE.

BUT HE LIKELY WILL GET HIS VISION FOR A TRILLION DOLLARS AND TO CONTINUE AS C.E.O.

BUT THEN THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS HE GOING TO DO WITH THAT ARMY?

>> GO TO MARS.

SARAH.

>> IF WE HAVE LEARNED ANYTHING IN THE LAST 10 MONTHS, IT'S THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP IS DETERMINED TO MAKE AS MUCH MONEY FOR HIMSELF, HIS FAMILY AND HIS BILLIONAIRE FRIENDS WHILE IN OFFICE.

THIS WEEK HE SURPRISED PERHAPS EVEN THE MOST CYNICAL AMONG US BY DEMANDING THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT PAY HIM $230 MILLION IN COMPENSATION FOR PAST FEDERAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO HIM.

PAID WITH TAXPAYERS MONEY.

THE STORY GETS WORSE BECAUSE ANY SETTLEMENT MIGHT BE APPROVED BY OFFICIALS WHO DEFENDED HIM IN THOSE LAWSUITS, INCLUDING TODD BLANCHE, THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL.

>> NOW WE WILL GO TO THE AS.

NINA.

>> I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO GIVE AN A TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND THEIR CRACKDOWN ON BIG PHARMA ADS.

ALTHOUGH SECRETARY OF HEALTH ROBERT F. KENNEDY REALLY WANTS AN OUTRIGHT BAN ON PRESCRIPTION DRUGS ADS, THE NEW REGULATIONS THAT CALL FOR GREATER DISCLOSURE OF SIDE EFFECTS ARE TO HELP "ENSURE THAT PATIENTS HAVE PROPER INFORMATION ABOUT DRUGS THAT HAVE POTENTIAL HARMS."

>> CHAD.

>> SO MY STUDENTS LAST NIGHT DID AN "IVORY TOWER" IN THE CLASSROOM EXPERIMENT WITH OUR OWN DAVID CHANATRY COMING IN TO GUEST MODERATE.

THEY WERE BRILLIANT.

I STOLE THEIR GOOD IDEAS TODAY.

SO ANYTHING GOOD I SAID TODAY, THAT'S FROM THE STUDENTS.

ANYTHING CRAZY, THAT'S JUST ME.

>> I BORED A COUPLE OF THEIR IDEAS AS WELL.

EXCUSE ME.

JENNY.

>> SO MY A GOES TO THE MILITARY VETERANS THAT I TAUGHT THIS WEEK THROUGH A PROGRAM AT SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY THAT HELPS VETERANS AND THEIR FAMILIES THINK THROUGH THE INS AND OUTS OF RUNNING FOR POLITICAL OFFICE.

THESE SERVICE MEMBERS REPRESENT THE BEST OF AMERICA.

A DIVERSE GROUP OF PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS, RELIGIONS AND BELIEFS ABOUT WHAT AILS OUR COMMUNITIES AND OUR NATION, BUT WHO SHARE A COMMON LOVE OF OUR NATION, OUR DEMOCRACY, AND WHO UNDERSTAND INTIMATELY THAT SERVICE, INCLUDING RUNNING FOR OFFICE, IS A NOBLE CALLING.

>> SARAH.

>> SEVEN MILLION PEOPLE TOOK TO THE STREETS LAST SATURDAY IN WHAT WAS THE SECOND LARGEST ONE-DAY PROTEST IN AMERICAN HISTORY.

THE NO KINGS PROTEST WERE PEACEFUL AND PATRIOTIC AND I WANT TO GIVE A SPECIAL SHOUTOUT TO THE FOLKS WHO SHOWED UP IN WHIMSICAL BLOW OF UP COSTUMES.

MANY WERE INSPIRED BY THE PORTLAND FROG BRIGADE, A GROUP OF PEOPLE PROTESTING PORTLAND'S ICE FACILITIES IN FROG COSTUMES AND NOT ONLY DID THESE COSTUMES DRAW PEOPLE IN BY MAKING THE PROTESTS LOOK REALLY FUN, THEY'RE A WAY TO DIFFUSE TENSION AND SHOUT OUT TO THEM.

>> THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING.

FOR COMMENTS YOU CAN WRITE TO THE ADDRESS ON YOUR SCREEN.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THE SHOW AGAIN YOU CAN VIEW IT ONLINE AT WCNY.ORG., I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FOR ALL OF US AT IVORY TOWER, HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.