Yann LeCun, chief A.I. scientist at Meta, said “the current state of machine learning is that it sucks.”Credit.Fabrice Coffrini/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Dear Commons Community,

Participants at this year’s Joint Mathematics Meetings explored everything from the role of A.I. to the hyperbolic design of a patchwork denim skirt.

The world’s largest gathering of mathematicians convened in Seattle from Jan. 8 to Jan. 11 — 5,444 mathematicians, 3,272 talks. This year the program diverged somewhat from the its traditional kaleidoscopic panorama. An official theme, “Mathematics in the Age of A.I.,” was set by Bryna Kra, the president of the American Mathematical Society, which hosts the event in collaboration with 16 partner organizations. In one configuration or another, the meeting, called the Joint Mathematics Meetings, or the J.M.M., has been held more or less annually for over a century.  As reported by The New York Times.

Dr. Kra intended the A.I. theme as a “wake-up call.” “A.I. is something that is in our lives, and it’s time to start thinking about how it impacts your teaching, your students, your research,” she said in an interview with The New York Times. “What does it mean to have A.I. as a co-author? These are the kinds of questions that we have to grapple with.”

On the second evening, Yann LeCun, the chief A.I. scientist at Meta, gave a keynote lecture titled “Mathematical Obstacles on the Way to Human-Level A.I.” Dr. LeCun got a bit into the technical weeds, but there were digestible tidbits.

“The current state of machine learning is that it sucks,” he said during the lecture, to much chortling. “Never mind humans, never mind trying to reproduce mathematicians or scientists; we can’t even reproduce what a cat can do.”

Instead of the generative large language models powering chatbots, he argued, a “large-scale world model” would be the better bet for advancing and improving the technology. Such a system, he said in an interview after the lecture, “can reason and plan because it has a mental model of the world that predicts consequences of its action.” But there are obstacles, he admitted — some mathematically intractable problems, their solutions nowhere in sight.

Deirdre Haskell, the director of the Fields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences in Toronto and a mathematician at McMaster University, said she appreciated Dr. LeCun’s reminder that, as she recalled, “the way we use the term A.I. today is only one way of possibly having an ‘artificial intelligence.’”

Dr. LeCun had noted in his lecture that the term artificial general intelligence, or A.G.I. — a machine with human-level intelligence — was a misnomer. Humans “do not have general intelligence at all,” he said. “We’re extremely specialized.” The preferred term at Meta, he said, is “advanced machine intelligence,” or AMI — “we pronounce it ‘ami,’ which means friend in French.”

Dr. Haskell was already sold on the importance of “using A.I. to do math, and the huge problem of understanding the math of A.I.” An expert in mathematical logic, she plans to use a theorem-proving program to create the equivalent of a textbook: a collection of results that can be used by A.I. systems to generate and verify more complex mathematical research and proofs.

For Kenny Banks, an undergraduate at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro who attended the J.M.M., artificial intelligence does not appeal as a tool for guiding exploration. “I think the mathematics that people currently love is driven by human curiosity, and what computers find interesting cannot be the same as what humans find interesting,” he said in an email. Nevertheless, he regretted not squeezing any A.I.-related talks into his itinerary. “The math + A.I. theme was definitely of interest, it just ended up not working with all the things I had planned!”

Other highlights are available here!

 Tony

Caroline Kennedy and Robert Kennedy, Jr.   Photo by Pat Hoelscher/AFP via Getty Images/ Kevin Lamarque – Pool/Getty Images

Dear Commons Community,

Caroline Kennedy, the only living child of former U.S. President John F. Kennedy, in a video (see below) posted on social media yesterday called her cousin, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of Health and Human Services, a predator.

“I have known Bobby my whole life,” Caroline Kennedy says in the video (below), in which she’s reading aloud a letter she wrote to senators. “We grew up together. It’s no surprise that he keeps birds of prey as pets because he himself is a predator.”

Robert Kennedy Jr., U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to run the Department of Health and Human Services, walks in the U.S. Capitol subway on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. on Dec. 17, 2024.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Caroline Kennedy’s son, Jack Schlossberg posted the video on X, formerly Twitter. He said his mother had sent it to a Senate committee, an action first reported by the Washington Post. RFK Jr.’s confirmation hearing is scheduled for today at 10 a.m.

In the letter, she praised her cousin for recovering from substance abuse but said before getting sober, he encouraged siblings and cousins to use drugs and they wound up addicted, ill or dead. She said, broadly, that her cousin had gone on to “misrepresent, lie and cheat his way through life.”

“Bobby is addicted to attention and power,” Caroline Kennedy says in the video. “Bobby preys on the desperation of parents of sick children – vaccinating his own kids, while building a following hypocritically discouraging other parents from vaccinating theirs.”

She characterized running the Department of Health and Human Services – which includes overseeing the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health – as “an enormous responsibility, and one that Bobby is unqualified to fill.”

“He lacks any relevant government, financial, management or medical experience,” Caroline Kennedy said. “His views on vaccines are dangerous and willfully misinformed. The facts alone should be disqualifying, but he has personal qualities related to this job, which, for me, pose even greater concern.”

RFK Jr. has acknowledged skeletons in his closet and admitted he is “not a church boy.” His children’s former babysitter, who is about 20 years his junior, accused him publicly of sexual assault. He apologized to her but said he had no memory of the alleged encounter. The case never went to court.

Seventy-seven Nobel Prize winners penned a letter in December urging the Senate not to confirm his appointment, saying his leadership would “put the public’s health in jeopardy.”

Thank you, Ms.  Kennedy. We hope the Republican senators heed your advice!

Tony

Penny Schwinn is greeted by students at Fairmount Elementary in Bristol, Tenn.

Credit:  David Crigger/Bristol Herald Courier via AP.

Dear Commons Community

Though Trump’s pick for the top education job, Linda McMahon, has limited experience in the field, she’ll be joined in leadership by a seasoned educator with a bipartisan track record—creating what could be an effective team for advancing the Trump administration’s priorities. The appointment of former Tennessee state education commissioner Penny Schwinn as deputy secretary at the U.S. Department of Education contrasts with Trump’s selection of McMahon for the agency’s top job.

McMahon’s background in business—as co-founder and former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO before serving as administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration in Trump’s first administration—and Schwinn’s robust education experience could pair well together, said Cate Sommervold, a professor at Doane University and author of a 2024 book on the nation’s 12 secretaries of education.  As reported in Education Week.

“They are a good balance of business acumen and experience in education—they complement each other,” Sommervold said in an email. “I believe that the complementary combination of the secretary and deputy secretary will allow for an effective team that will be able to make the significant policy moves that the president has proposed.”

Schwinn’s appointment was also greeted with optimism by three former secretaries of education who served presidents from both parties, and other policy watchers expressed hope that her selection foretells a focus in the federal agency on bolstering academics following historic achievement declines.

The reaction has been more mixed in right-wing circles. When Schwinn left her job in Tennessee in 2023, she criticized culture war battles over gender and race instruction as “extraneous politics” in an interview at the time with The 74.

But the Trump administration is already wading into fiery policy decisions by rolling back protections for transgender students and overturning previous policy that prohibited immigration officials from making arrests on school property.

Under one of Trump’s directives, the Education Department suspended staff who were involved with diversity, equity, and inclusion work. Its office for civil rights also dismissed claims related to district book removals and eliminated a coordinator position the Biden administration created to “address the growing threat that book bans pose for the civil rights of students.”

Supporters of Schwinn’s appointment hope it portends a focus on learning outcomes.

“She has proven to be capable and practical, solutions-oriented, and willing to reach across the aisle to get things done,” said Roberto Rodriguez, who worked at the Education Department during the Obama and Biden administrations. “I think she’ll be a good partner.”

Schwinn draws praise for her work on literacy in Tennessee

The pick of McMahon as secretary of education drew a swift denunciation from the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers’ union.

Schwinn’s appointment, by contrast, drew no immediate reaction from either of the nation’s two largest teachers’ unions. Three former education secretaries, meanwhile, thought she was a promising pick.

Arne Duncan, who served under Democratic President Barack Obama, described her during a Jan. 21 Brookings Institution panel as “a serious person.”

“She’s smart, she cares about kids,” he said.

Schwinn served as Tennessee’s schools chief under Republican Gov. Bill Lee from 2019 to 2023. She started her K-12 career as a Teach For America teacher in Baltimore, before later moving into education leadership positions in several states. She had most recently worked at the University of Florida and earlier in her career founded a Sacramento charter school. Schwinn is a proponent of school choice—a priority for the Trump administration—but has also discussed a need for fiscal and academic accountability measures as part of policies expanding choice.

During her tenure as Tennessee schools chief, she oversaw the development of the first federally registered teacher apprenticeship program, oversaw implementation of a 2021 state law requiring that schools shift to evidence-based early literacy instruction, and led a review of the state’s funding formula that led to its first revision in decades.

“When she was in Tennessee, she was a voice for urgency around helping students read better, do math better, graduate better prepared for college and careers,” John King Jr., who served as education secretary under Obama, said on the same Brookings panel. “We need that kind of leadership in this moment; we are still way behind where we were before COVID.”

Margaret Spellings, who served under Republican President George W. Bush, echoed the sentiment.

“They’ve been in government,” she said of Schwinn and McMahon. “They know how to work with a legislative body. There’s some real encouraging signs.”

Schwinn is a less polarizing pick than the No. 2 in Trump’s first Education Department

During Trump’s first administration, the president’s pick for the No. 2 slot at the Education Department, Mick Zais, the former South Carolina state chief, was nearly as polarizing as Trump’s selection of Betsy DeVos for education secretary.

Schwinn cuts a different mold, and she could help the Trump administration overcome some of the animosity created by the president’s executive orders targeting career staffers, said Carlas McCauley, who worked at the department as a career staffer from 2007 to 2014.

“Penny Schwinn is incredible,” said McCauley, an associate professor of education leadership and policy studies at Howard University. “I’ve watched her, from Delaware to Texas to Tennessee, build the kind of rapport internally, regardless of party line, to fight for and educate the most vulnerable student populations in the country.”

Her background as a state chief—especially one with a “proven track record”—will be vital in a role that’s heavy on state-federal relations, said Carey M. Wright, the state superintendent of schools for Maryland, who calls Schwinn a good friend and whose tenure as Mississippi’s state schools chief overlapped with Schwinn’s in Tennessee.

“It’s easy to sit up in an office and say, ‘Oh, let’s make the states do X.’ If you don’t have any experience at doing X, you have no idea the amount of work that goes into implementation and execution at a state level to get that accomplished,” Wright said.

Schwinn understands how fellow state chiefs will respond to new policies and initiatives from the department, and knowing how things are done at the state level will ultimately help the federal agency, Wright said.

Schwinn has “a real depth in background,” particularly when it comes to operating large, complex bureaucracies, said Jim Blew, who served in the agency during Trump’s first term.

“That puts her in a position to be very helpful to the secretary,” said Blew, who is now a co-founder of the Defense of Freedom Institute, a nonprofit focused on conservative policy solutions. “She’s going to be a great deputy secretary.”

Whereas McMahon’s job will have her interfacing with the White House, Schwinn’s will have her managing the department. With the two seeming “very aligned philosophically,” Blew anticipates they’ll complement each other well.

Her appointment, however, has rankled some on the right.

When right-wing activist Christopher Rufo, a high-profile critic of diversity, equity, and inclusion policies, came out in support of Schwinn’s appointment last week, his post about it on the social media platform X drew several critical responses from conservatives.

During her tenure in Tennessee, one move that drew criticism from Republicans was a policy providing COVID relief funds to districts to support at-home well-being checks of students during the pandemic.

Schwinn’s pick signifies making use of the department, rather than abolishing it

Schwinn’s and McMahon’s confirmation hearings have yet to be scheduled, but they’re sure to feature questions for both about their thoughts on eliminating the U.S. Department of Education—a key Trump education priority.

The administration has two options—diminish the agency’s role and move its essential functions to other departments, or use it for various political ends, whether that’s as a “machine of culture war” or expanding private school choice, said Mark Hlavacik, an associate professor of communication studies at the University of North Texas.

“I see the decision to add Schwinn in that [latter] direction,” Hlavacik said. “There are plans to make use of the Department of Education.”

It’s a risk for the department to get “distracted” with matters like rolling back diversity, equity, and inclusion, rather than focusing on learning, said Rodriguez. He hopes the addition of Schwinn is a good sign that learning will take precedence.

“That work—the real work around teaching and learning, student well-being and success, and economic preparedness, economic competitiveness—that can’t wait. That is very urgent work,” Rodriguez said.

Wright said Schwinn is good at keeping “the main thing, the main thing.”

“We’re all out here trying to make sure that students lives are changed for the positive, and that they become good readers, and have numeracy under their belts—all the things that you want young adults growing into,” she said.

Blew predicts a second Trump term that looks a lot different from the first, with the president taking office focused on issues squarely in the Education Department’s portfolio—including Title IX, student loan debt, and DEI.

“I think the White House will be much more engaged in shaping the Education Department’s agenda and work this time,” he said.

Penny Schwinn sounds like a good choice. We wish her luck!

Tony

Source:  President’s Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration (July 23. 2024).

Dear Commons Community,

The following is taken from an article that appeared this morning in The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Tony

————————–

What’s New

As immigration enforcement ramps up under the new Trump administration, some public colleges are releasing statements and revised protocols for what faculty, staff, and students should do if they are approached by federal authorities.

The announcements from institutions follow a slew of immigration-related orders signed by President Trump during his first week in office. In response, the Department of Homeland Security issued a directive rescinding a policy that had protected schools and colleges from Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. Public colleges now could be subject to enforcement actions, including arrests by ICE officers, without advance notice.

Around 400,000 college students nationwide are undocumented.

The Details

Previously, immigration officers were required to get approval from DHS — “their agency’s headquarters or an authorized delegate” — to carry out enforcement actions on campuses, thanks to a policy protecting “sensitive” areas. The Trump administration’s move last week reversed guidelines that had been in place for over a decade.

Colleges are still bound by the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA, which prohibits schools from releasing students’ records to law-enforcement officers — unless the request is related to a valid court order or subpoena.

Some colleges have released information regarding what ICE can and cannot do on their campuses. Northern Illinois University published a resource page specifying which areas of campus are publicly accessible, such as library common areas, hallways of academic buildings, and cultural centers.

Other colleges announced plans to comply with law enforcement, but it’s not yet clear what compliance would look like.

During a faculty-council meeting at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill on Friday, Chancellor Lee Roberts said the university will “follow the law” when questioned about responding to the new directive.

“If we’re asked by law enforcement, we’re going to comply with any requests from law enforcement about that or anything else,” Roberts said at the meeting.

Jonathan Holloway, president of Rutgers University, which includes three campuses, emailed senior administrators on Friday advising faculty and staff members and students to contact Rutgers’ police department if they become aware of ICE activities on campus.

“Rutgers is committed to ensuring that any federal enforcement actions on campus adhere to due process, including the requirement of a warrant when necessary,” Holloway wrote in the message, which a university spokesperson provided to The Chronicle.

The Backdrop

Many of these campus guidelines aren’t new. Some colleges have had immigration- and ICE-related policies and resources for years; Trump’s second term has just drawn fresh attention to the issue.

For instance, Marquette University released a statement on Friday listing existing protocols in place that protect students’ privacy.

“For any outside agency that comes to campus, it has always been Marquette’s policy to direct officials to MUPD first to verify there is a legitimate, lawful request and then to respond as required under the law,” Marquette’s statement reads.

What to Watch For

The Trump administration has yet to publish guidance on how federal officials will deal with “sensitive” areas like college campuses going forward.

Miriam Feldblum, executive director of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, said that although protections have been lifted, that doesn’t mean the Trump administration’s directive is “about prioritizing previously sensitive locations.” The alliance is a group of university leaders that aims to educate the public on how immigration policies affect students.

Feldblum said the withdrawal of the sensitive-areas policy is concerning “because of the anxiety and uncertainty it generates.”

“Colleges and universities are deeply committed to national security, to the support of students,” Feldblum said. “These can be done together, but when you create the uncertainty and fear, then you’re not allowing students who really are coming to learn, to flourish, to be able to do so.”

But the Trump administration’s directive “is not the time to panic,” Feldblum added.

“It’s the time to prepare and collaborate and communicate on campus,” she said.

Dear Commons Community,

Wall Street’s tech  superstars tumbled  yesterday as a competitor from China threatens to upend the artificial-intelligence frenzy that’s helped them make so much money.

The S&P 500 was down 1.6% in  trading and heading for its worst day in more than a month. Big Tech stocks took some of the heaviest losses, with Nvidia down 13%, and they dragged the Nasdaq composite down 3.0% or 612 points.

Stocks outside of AI-related industries held up much better, though, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 289  points.  As reported by the Associated Press.

The shock to financial markets came from China, where a company called DeepSeek said it had developed a large language model that can compete with U.S. giants but at a fraction of the cost. DeepSeek’s app had already hit the top of Apple’s App Store chart by yesterday morning, and analysts said such a feat would be particularly impressive given how the U.S. government has restricted Chinese access to top AI chips.

Skepticism, though, remains about how much DeepSeek’s announcement will ultimately shake the AI supply chain, from the chip makers making semiconductors to the utilities hoping to electrify vast data centers gobbling up computing power.

“It remains to be seen if DeepSeek found a way to work around these chip restrictions rules and what chips they ultimately used as there will be many skeptics around this issue given the information is coming from China,” according to Dan Ives, an analyst with Wedbush Securities.

DeepSeek’s disruption nevertheless rocked stock markets worldwide.

In Amsterdam, Dutch chip supplier ASML slid 7.2%. In Tokyo, Japan’s Softbank Group Corp. lost 8.3% and is nearly back to where it was before leaping on an announcement trumpeted by the White House that it was joining a partnership to invest up to $500 billion in AI infrastructure.

And on Wall Street, shares of Constellation Energy sank 20.3%. The company has said it would restart the shuttered Three Mile Island nuclear power plant to supply power for data centers for Microsoft.

All the worries sent investors toward bonds, which can be safer investments than any stock. The rush sent the yield of the 10-year Treasury down to 4.54% from 4.62% late Friday.

It’s a sharp turnaround for the AI winners, which had soared in recent years on hopes that all the investment pouring into the industry would lead to a possible remaking of the global economy, along with huge profits along the way.

Nvidia’s stock had soared from less than $20 to more than $140 in less than two years before Monday’s drop, for example.

Other Big Tech companies had also joined in the frenzy, and their stock prices had benefited too. It was just on Friday that Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg was saying he expects to invest up to $65 billion this year, while talking up a massive data center Meta is building in Louisiana that is so large it would cover an area equal to a significant part of Manhattan.

Such companies have become so dominant that they’ve taken the nickname of the “Magnificent Seven.”

In stock markets abroad, movements for indexes across Europe and Asia weren’t as forceful as for the big U.S. tech stocks. France’s CAC 40 fell 0.1%, and Germany’s DAX lost 0.4%.

In Asia, stocks edged 0.1% lower in Shanghai after a survey of manufacturers showed export orders in China dropping to a five-month low.

The Federal Reserve holds its latest policy meeting later this week. Traders don’t expect recent weak data to push the Fed to cut its main interest rate. They’re virtually certain the central bank will hold steady, according to data from CME Group.

We will continue to see rigorous competition from China where investments from the centralized government and big business have been very focused on AI development.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) criticized President Donald Trump after he recently pardoned over 1,500 people charged in connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, including some who assaulted law enforcement officers.

In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” on Sunday, Graham said the controversial pardons “sent the wrong signal.”

During the interview, Bash brought up Daniel Rodriguez, a Jan. 6 rioter who was sentenced to 12 years in prison, after tasing and beating former District of Columbia Metropolitan Police officer Michael Fanone.

Fanone suffered a heart attack due to the assault.

“On Monday, [Rodriguez] was among those who got a full pardon. Are you OK with that?” Bash asked Graham.

“No,” Graham responded. “I think when you pardon people who attack police officers, you’re sending the wrong signal to the public at large, and it’s not what you want to be to protect cops, but [the president] has that power.”

Graham then switched gears to calling out former President Joe Biden for offering clemency to the defendants who shot two FBI agents in South Dakota, as well as granting last-minute pardons to his family, including his son Hunter, after claiming he would not do so.

“President Trump at least said, ‘I’m gonna do this,’” Graham declared.

“I don’t like this. I don’t like it on either side, and I think the public doesn’t like it either,” he continued. “So if this continues, if this is the norm, it may be an effort to reign in the pardon power of the president as an institution.”

Graham went on to unleash an accusatory rant about Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris supporting convicted criminals, prompting Bash to turn the conversation back to Trump.

Bash then questioned Graham about his thoughts on seeing Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the far-right anti-government militia Oath Keepers, at a Trump rally in Las Vegas on Saturday night.

“I don’t think there’s a restriction on him being there. I don’t like this,” he said.

Graham wrapped up his comments by telling Bash and CNN viewers, “If you got an idea about how to rein in the pardon power of the president that goes too far, give me a call.”

In a separate interview on NBC News’ “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Graham echoed similar thoughts on Trump’s decision to pardon the Jan. 6 rioters last week.

“Pardoning the people who went into the Capitol and beat up a police officer violently I think was a mistake,” he said.

It was more than a mistake.  It was a disgrace!

Tony

Trump and Sam Altman in the White House.  Credit…Jim Watson/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Dear Commons Community,

New York Times columnist, Maureen Dowd, had a piece yesterday entitled, Fast Times at West Wing High, in which she reviews the latest shenanigans in the White House among Trump and tech giants including Elon Musk, San Altman, and Steve Zuckerberg. 

Here are two clips from her column:

“the digerati gazed east and discovered a fascinating new toy they could fight over: the American president. Suddenly, Democratic Silicon Valley is Trump country. The moment crystallized when Zuckerberg — fed up with Democrats’ sermonizing about his company’s failure to shut down misinformation in 2016 — bought a yacht, put on a gold necklace and got a streetwear makeover, declared that Donald Trump’s response to the assassination attempt was “one of the most bad-ass things I’ve ever seen in my life,” and ended fact-checking at Meta.”

And:

“the tech moguls thought: This could be cool, to not only control all communications and manipulate all emotions in the country, but to reprogram the government’s regulatory engine so it runs like we want it to! Just give some puny millions to Trump’s campaign and inauguration, throw some flattery at the unquenchable maw of Trump’s ego, and you were suddenly at his elbow onstage in the Capitol when he swept back into power.

Trump is a 78-year-old Luddite who has a beautiful young woman nicknamed the “human printer” following him around with a petite printer in her backpack. She cranks out positive stories to show him and takes dictation for his social media posts. He still prefers a Sharpie to a keyboard.

Yet suddenly he’s the savior of TikTok teens and crypto bros. King Donald’s court is filled with the lords of the cloud, courtiers who are bringing their chaos and drama to a Trump orbit brimming with chaos and drama.”

Her entire column is below.

Boys just want to have fun!

Tony

The New York Times

Fast Times at West Wing High

Jan. 25, 2025

By Maureen Dowd

Opinion Columnist, reporting from Washington

When I drove around Silicon Valley in 2017, talking to tech gods for a magazine piece, trying to figure out if A.I. would be friend or foe, Washington barely seemed to be on their radar.

As far as they were concerned, they were the nation’s capital. In D.C., pols merely passed laws. In Silicon Valley, techies were creating a new species, trying to conjure a nonhuman sentient mind. Forget Henry Adams; this was Mary Shelley stuff. Some tech titans were buoyant about the future. Some were wary. Elon Musk warned we might be “summoning the demon.”

Silicon Valley was run by a bunch of boys with toys. Brilliant, quirky young engineers trying to get more toys than the others, better rockets or self-driving cars or robots. They were developing a monopoly on Americans’ attention, learning how to ratchet up the algorithms to create division, distrust and envy, siloing people and spreading angst — all under the innocent guise of connecting us and making our lives better.

Within their own elite circle, the tech billionaires were volatile — sometimes friendly, sometimes feuding, sometimes, in the case of Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, threatening cage matches, sometimes, in the case of Musk, selling off his houses and sleeping on friends’ couches. They were the richest, most potent men in the world, with a visceral high school vibe. They were the bitchiest, weirdest mathletes in history.

Eventually, the digerati gazed east and discovered a fascinating new toy they could fight over: the American president. Suddenly, Democratic Silicon Valley is Trump country. The moment crystallized when Zuckerberg — fed up with Democrats’ sermonizing about his company’s failure to shut down misinformation in 2016 — bought a yacht, put on a gold necklace and got a streetwear makeover, declared that Donald Trump’s response to the assassination attempt was “one of the most bad-ass things I’ve ever seen in my life,” and ended fact-checking at Meta.

Wow, the tech moguls thought: This could be cool, to not only control all communications and manipulate all emotions in the country, but to reprogram the government’s regulatory engine so it runs like we want it to! Just give some puny millions to Trump’s campaign and inauguration, throw some flattery at the unquenchable maw of Trump’s ego, and you were suddenly at his elbow onstage in the Capitol when he swept back into power.

Trump is a 78-year-old Luddite who has a beautiful young woman nicknamed the “human printer” following him around with a petite printer in her backpack. She cranks out positive stories to show him and takes dictation for his social media posts. He still prefers a Sharpie to a keyboard.

Yet suddenly he’s the savior of TikTok teens and crypto bros. King Donald’s court is filled with the lords of the cloud, courtiers who are bringing their chaos and drama to a Trump orbit brimming with chaos and drama. At the inauguration, the tech tycoons outranked most of the political class in the seating placement — sitting on par with former presidents.

It’s a remarkable spectacle watching an entirely new power center flock to Washington, fight for Trump’s attention, jockey to prove their loyalty, post groveling encomiums to Trump, throw money at him, clamor for eight-figure mansions around town.

As the OpenAI chief Sam Altman gushed on X this past week: “watching @potus more carefully recently has really changed my perspective on him,” adding, “i’m not going to agree with him on everything, but i think he will be incredible for the country in many ways.”

Trump, who always wanted elites to love him, relishes the crème de la tech lining up to kiss his ring. If they see him as a new toy to compete over, he sees them the same way.

The returning president wasted no time putting the cat among the pigeons when he held a news conference Tuesday announcing a joint venture among OpenAI, SoftBank and Oracle called “Stargate” to generate about $100 billion in computing infrastructure for A.I., with a goal to invest $500 billion by the end of Trump’s term.

Trump, savoring his new image as a champion of Silicon Valley in its bid to beat out China on A.I., showcased Altman at the White House, even though he knows Altman and Musk — who co-founded OpenAI — are in a legal feud. Elon has accused his former pal, Sam, of deserting their original mission when he changed its nonprofit status to for-profit; Altman allies think Musk is just jealous that the young, ragtag crew working in a makeshift office blasted off a few years after he left, ultimately creating ChatGPT.

Musk went bananas (or more bananas) on X, declaring that the troika did not have the money for such an initiative. Altman fired back, saying Musk was wrong, and Musk escalated the brawl by posting old Altman tweets criticizing Trump.

It was an eye-popping crack in the Donald/Elon bromance, which is being watched closely now that Trump has given Musk the power to roam the West Wing, where he is working out of an office on the second floor, and take a hatchet to government.

Furious Trump aides told Politico that the mercurial Musk got over his skis, discrediting a project Trump had just called “tremendous” and “monumental.”

Did Trump think flirting with Musk’s nemesis was a good way to put Elon in his place and remind people that there’s only one star of the Trump show?

Asked by reporters about Musk undermining him, Trump was nonchalant. He knows from digital insults.

The president dismissed it as a personality clash, noting that Musk “hates one of the people,” allowing, “I have certain hatreds of people, too.”

The colliding egos of Silicon Valley have joined the colliding egos on the Potomac, but the president is not perturbed. Mixing it up, stirring conflict for its own sake, this is just how Donald Trump has fun.

Dan Snyder:  Photo Courtesy of the Associated Press.

Dear Commons Community,

Yahoo Sports is reporting that the  former owner of the Washington Commanders, Dan Snyder, “f***ing hates” the success the team has had this year.  This afternoon the Commanders will be playing the Philadelphia Eagles for the championship of the NFL’s National Football Conference.  The Washington Commanders are a win away from reaching the Super Bowl and with rookie quarterback Jayden Daniels leading the way, the franchise is going through a rebirth.  As reported by Yahoo Sports and ESPN.

New ownership, a potential franchise quarterback and a revitalized fan base defines the current state of the Commanders. It wasn’t that way for a long time under Daniel Snyder, and the team’s 2024 success, coupled with the way Snyder was ejected from the NFL, has reportedly led to hurt feelings from the former owner.

An ESPN story from Seth Wickersham and Don Van Natta Jr. reports a longtime associate of Snyder attended a dinner with the former Washington owner in the fall and had one takeaway when it comes to the Commanders’ success this season.

“He f***ing hates it,” the associate reportedly told a colleague.

Snyder bought the team in 1999 when the franchise was known as the Redskins. The lack of on-field success — six playoff appearances in 24 years — coupled with a dysfunctional and toxic workplace off the field ultimately led to the team’s 2023 sale to Josh Harris.

It was a transaction that Snyder tried to derail, Wickersham and Van Natta report. While still negotiating with Harris, Snyder was contemplating ways to retain the franchise.

One thought Snyder reportedly had was to announce that his behavior over the years was due to alcohol, but that he had given up drinking and was a changed man. The $6 billion minimum price tag was also purposefully set knowing that only a limited number of parties could afford it. Harris and his group paid $6.05 billion.

Once the process reached closing, Snyder reportedly refused to share his bank information to allow Harris to wire the money. After friends, including former Washington head coach Joe Gibbs, and family members pressed him to let go of the team, he finally relented late in the night, hours before an event was scheduled welcoming the Harris group as new owners.

Minutes after NFL team owners unanimously approved Harris’ purchase, the league released a 23-page report containing the findings of Mary Jo White, the attorney tasked with investigating sexual harassment and financial impropriety allegations against Snyder.

The conclusions of the report would be devastating for a man still in the NFL. It corroborated serious harassment allegations from former Commanders employee Tiffani Johnston and claimed the club had cooked its books to avoid sharing money with the NFL.

In response to the investigation, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell fined Snyder $60 million — a fine that Snyder initially refused to pay but was ultimately made part of the ownership transaction.

Snyder, now 60, lives in London with numerous legal issues still pending in the U.S. He reportedly was interested in buying part of a Premier League soccer team, but other sources said that American football is his only interest.

“He isn’t a fan of other sports,” a source told ESPN. “He’s a fan of the [Commanders]. That was the biggest thing.”

“Poor Dan”!

Tony

Cardinal Timothy Dolan

Reverend Mariann Edgar Budde

Dear Commons Community,

Celia Viggo Wexler,  author of “Catholic Women Confront Their Church: Stories of Hurt and Hope” had a guest essay in yesterday’s New York Daily News entitled, “How Catholic bishops fail their country” that focuses on the political positions of the country’s Catholic leadership.  She specifically compares the roles that New York’s Cardinal Timothy Dolan played during Trump’s inauguration and a prayer service  that the Reverend MariannEdgard Budde led in the Washington Cathedral. She commented that Budde spoke truth to power while Dolan did not.  Here is Wexler’s introduction.

“Two prelates played prominent roles at the inauguration of President Trump. One seized the opportunity to speak truth to power; the other did not.

New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the most prominent Catholic leader in the country, gave the invocation on Monday in the Capitol Rotunda. The Right Rev. Mariann Budde, who heads the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, led the inauguration prayer service the next day at the Washington National Cathedral.

Budde minced no words, speaking directly to the new president seated just a few feet away:

“In the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared now, … on those in our communities whose children fear that their parents will be taken away and that you help those who are fleeing war zones and persecution in their own lands …”

But Budde’s courage stands in marked contrast to Dolan’s silence, even after Trump fulfilled his pledge to go after undocumented immigrants, even in churches and schools.

The silence is nothing unusual. As a Catholic feminist, I’m ashamed to say that the voices of Catholic leaders, whose flock includes about 30 million Catholic voters, have largely been missing in the struggle to save America’s soul.

That’s because for too many Catholic bishops, the marginalized and vulnerable have one key failing: they’ve already been born.

Why didn’t the bishops raise the alarm much sooner when Catholic voters might have paid attention? Because the bishops are focused on one issue — opposition to abortion.”

She is right on.  American bishops have been blind to any issue but abortion even when Pope Francis condemns policies directed at vulnerable immigrants.

I already sent one email earlier this week to the New York Archdiocese criticizing Cardinal Dolan’s presence and comments at Trump’s inauguration.

Wexler’s entire piece is below.

Tony

——————————————————–

The New York Daily News

How Catholic bishops fail their country.

By Celia Viggo Wexler:

January 25, 2025

Two prelates played prominent roles at the inauguration of President Trump. One seized the opportunity to speak truth to power; the other did not.

New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the most prominent Catholic leader in the country, gave the invocation on Monday in the Capitol Rotunda. The Right Rev. Marian Budde, who heads the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, led the inauguration prayer service the next day at the Washington National Cathedral.

Budde minced no words, speaking directly to the new president seated just a few feet away:

“In the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared now, … on those in our communities whose children fear that their parents will be taken away and that you help those who are fleeing war zones and persecution in their own lands …”

But Budde’s courage stands in marked contrast to Dolan’s silence, even after Trump fulfilled his pledge to go after undocumented immigrants, even in churches and schools.

The silence is nothing unusual. As a Catholic feminist, I’m ashamed to say that the voices of Catholic leaders, whose flock includes about 30 million Catholic voters, have largely been missing in the struggle to save America’s soul.

That’s because for too many Catholic bishops, the marginalized and vulnerable have one key failing: they’ve already been born.

Why didn’t the bishops raise the alarm much sooner when Catholic voters might have paid attention? Because the bishops are focused on one issue — opposition to abortion.”

In the 2016 campaign, Trump pledged to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade, ending the nearly 50-year-old constitutional protection for legal abortion.

This was one promise he kept, an accomplishment not lost on strident Catholic abortion foes, and their biggest clerical cheerleaders.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) made that clear in its 2024 voters’ guide. Candidates’ positions on abortion should be the “pre-eminent priority” for Catholics.

In 2024, more than six out of 10 devout white Catholics — 64% — preferred Trump over Kamala Harris. Latino Catholics voted for Harris, but by much smaller margins than for Joe Biden in 2020. Overall, 53% of Catholics supported Trump. In 2020, Biden narrowly won the Catholic vote by 1%. Catholics make up about one-fifth of the electorate.

To be sure, if the bishops had spoken out earlier it might not have necessarily influenced enough voters to change the results. But they could have raised the alarm post-election.

The bishops said they were keeping their powder dry until the administration gave a stronger signal of its plans. “We are waiting to see what takes shape,” said El Paso Bishop Mark Seitz, who chairs the bishops’ committee on migration. The bishops then would “raise our voice loudly” in opposition.

Now that Trump is putting his plans into action, where are those loud voices? Bishop Seitz ultimately did decry Trump’s decision to empower federal immigration agents to enter churches, schools, and possibly even hospitals to round up the undocumented. Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich raised similar concerns.

But Archbishop Timothy Broglio, the head of the USCCB, issued a statement on the Trump executive orders that was the bare minimum one would expect from the Catholic Church. He deemed the executive orders on immigrants and refugees, foreign aid and the death penalty, “deeply troubling,” but praised Trump’s order recognizing two biological sexes, male and female.

Indeed, the USCCB was promoting only one protest event on its website: a prayer vigil before yesterday’s annual March for Life, which the bishops have long supported, and which brings thousands of Catholic students and parishioners to the nation’s capital to lobby Congress to protect the unborn.

Fifty years ago, some Catholic leaders were wiser and bolder. Rev. Theodore Hesburgh, longtime president of Notre Dame University, was held in such high esteem that he served on a score of presidential commissions, including the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, whose hearings on racism led to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Speaking in 1974, during the Vietnam War, Hesburgh maintained: “We cannot be loud in condemning abortion after being silent about napalmed Vietnamese or seemingly unconscious of the horrible present fact that 60% of the children already born in the poorest countries … die before the age of 5.”

But those days are gone. Most prelates will go to bat for the “pre-born.” Their passion for life declines dramatically after delivery.

Wexler is the author of “Catholic Women Confront Their Church: Stories of Hurt and Hope” (2016, Rowman & Littlefield.) She has written extensively about Catholic feminism and church politics.

Dear Commons Community,

On Thursday, Trump signed an executive order aimed at declassifying any remaining federal records relating to the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, his brother, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, as well as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

“Everything will be revealed,” Trump told reporters.

Although the previously classified documents may help prove or disprove the many conspiracy theories that have popped up in the six decades since the killings, Jack Schlossberg, the son of Caroline Kennedy and grandson of JFK, isn’t on board with their declassification.

The 32-year-old political correspondent for Vogue magazine took to X after Trump’s executive order and wrote that there was “nothing heroic” about the release of documents.

“The truth is a lot sadder than the myth — a tragedy that didn’t need to happen. Not part of an inevitable grand scheme,” he wrote. “Declassification is using JFK as a political prop, when he’s not here to punch back. There’s nothing heroic about it.”

Considering that Schlossberg’s grandfather was murdered in cold blood, many people were surprised he didn’t see the value of releasing any documents relating to the tragedy.

I am one of those who would like to see the release of these documents.  As a teenager when Kennedy was assassinated, I was devastated.  Kennedy was a hero for many in my generation.  We never felt we got the full story of what happened. So, respectfully, I welcome a declassification.

Tony