Episode Transcript
[00:00:14] Speaker A: Hello, welcome to the Call It Like I See it podcast.
I'm James Keys, and in this episode of Call It Like I See it, we're going to take a look at Black History Month and discuss how teaching black history, or history from the perspective of blacks and African Americans appears to have become quite controversial in today's society. And I say appears because maybe it's not as controversial as it may seem, but, you know, it definitely has that appearance. And later on, we'll take a look at ChatGPT, OpenAI's artificial intelligence chat box system that many have found to be able to converse and generate written content at a shockingly high level. Higher than a lot of people in some instances.
Joining me today is a man who drops knowledge so profound that if you're not prepared, it can make you go crazy.
Tunde Ogo and Lana Tunde, are you going to tell the people how to prepare for when they play that new tune day?
[00:01:22] Speaker B: Nope.
[00:01:23] Speaker A: All right.
[00:01:24] Speaker B: If I tell them all that, they won't listen. They won't listen to the show.
[00:01:27] Speaker A: So, yeah, shock value, man. I'm with you.
[00:01:28] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:01:29] Speaker A: All right, now we're recording this on February 6, 2023. And as we all know, February is Black History month in the U.S. interestingly enough, it's also recognized in Canada, United Kingdom, and Ireland.
In the US the practice which led to Black History Month began back in 1926, almost 100 years ago, with the association for the Study of Negro Life and History, which they're now known as the association for the Study of African American Life and History, sponsored a National Negro History week.
By the 60s, Negro History Week had evolved into Black History Month. And then in 1976, President Ford officially recognized it, inviting Americans to, quote, seize the opportunity to honor the too often neglected accomplishments of black Americans in every area of endeavor throughout our history, unquote. But throughout history, we know that both what is told about history and how it is told have often been matters of great contention. And we've been seeing this some recently with how it relates to black history, even to the extent where there are some that seemingly want to block out the telling of the history involving blacks in the U.S. even stuff that's within living memory of our society.
But, Tunde, before we get there, let's start this out more broadly. What does Black History Month mean to you? And, you know, how do you think, you know, we should be observing it or, you know, types of things we should do to note it coming up, you know, in February of each year.
[00:03:04] Speaker B: That's a good Question.
It's funny, you asked me straight up, what does Black History Month mean to me? And I kind of realized, I guess it's meant different things to me at different parts of my life journey. Because when I was.
[00:03:16] Speaker A: Oh, okay.
[00:03:17] Speaker B: Yeah. When I was in school, it was just, okay, the teacher said that it's this month and they're gonna have. Remember when we were kids, because it was public TV mostly back then there. That's when they would have shows like Roots and they would have all the stuff on Martin Luther King and.
[00:03:30] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:03:30] Speaker B: So you just figured, okay, that's what I'm gonna learn this month.
[00:03:33] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:03:33] Speaker B: And that made me realize that's back, actually, because I guess there was just less.
Less options in our media landscape back then. You. Let's say in the 1980s, there would actually be educational stuff on TV about black history. And so you would actually learn something that you may not pick up at other times of the year.
I think with the not. Not from any intentional thing, but through the plethora of media outlets and Internet and all that over the last generation or so, that's been kind of lost up until recently. In the last probably two years, I've seen some of the streaming services and all that make an effort to put some sort of information back in this month that deals with black history. So that's one side of me that's like, okay, that's kind of the, you know, the formal societal kind of definition of it for me. But then if I want to get more esoteric or nuanced in it, I could say the whole idea that we have to have a month that singles out one group in a larger society to discuss their accomplishments or role in that larger group's kind of, I guess, whole experience is still something interesting. And in one way, I think it's good that we highlight the accomplishments of blacks and throughout the history of this country and accomplishments and all that and what's they've given to this country and in terms of adding to its kind of fabric?
So that's good. But in another way, the fact that we feel the need we have to do it. I think there's something wrong with that as well, that are black people not considered part of the American fabric in a way where their stories can just be organically told within the greater kind of discussions of American life and history.
[00:05:28] Speaker A: That's interesting you say that, because to.
[00:05:30] Speaker B: Me, it's a mixed feelings kind of thing.
[00:05:32] Speaker A: Yeah, I actually. I don't agree with you on that last point in this. In this sense, I think that in a society where you have a minority group, I think the natural inclination, you could take out malice. I think the natural inclination would be to focus on where most of the people are, you know, so to speak, and humans are tribal and all, you know, and all that. So, so yes, you would think in the abstract there's going to be equal amount of attention regardless of, you know, the creed or the color or whatever or the person that did it. But there are certain narratives that take hold and certain emphasis that happen in terms of the way you learn. And I think when you, when you're a minority group in society, it's something that you need, that would need to have an emphasis on or else it'll kind of get lost in the shuffle. So like, and that's without the malice. I mean, and there's been plenty of malice throughout the United States history. So it's, it's. But I'm saying just naturally, I think, but to me, I think I look at it as something as an opportunity to teach and, or to learn, depending on where you are. And so I would sum up my view on it from when I was younger was. Is different in the sense that it is now only because I feel like my, the balance of whether. Of how much I'm teaching versus how much I've learning is changing, you know, so to speak. So. And when I was younger, you know, it was an opportunity like, led by the schools in many respects, but also civic organizations that I belong to. We, we made it an effort to, to, to learn things, you know, whether it be okay. Yeah, that means we're going to have to do a book report on a famous black person, you know, in this month. And, and that's one of, one of the, my assignments I'm going to have to do when I'm in sixth grade or seventh grade or, you know, all of those. But also just it's, it's a time to kind of, okay, hey, we don't hit on these themes or these points that often. You know, they, they get left out again because of malice or just because of the way things kind of evolve in a majority minority society.
And we're going to make a focus to try to try to look at this this month. And I think now it's the same kind of thing, but now it's more of okay, hey, I want to make sure I'm exposing my kids to certain things or just trying to now instead of I still want to learn. I didn't say your role goes from one to the Other, you know, you always should be learning. If you're. You're living, you should be learning. But, you know, I. Now, I feel like I have an obligation now to try to pass on some of that information, to pass on some of that emphasis, because again, it's something. When it's 12% of a population, it can get lost in the shuffle. And, you know, when there's, There's. We can't learn all of history, you know, like, we can't learn all of what happened in a decade. We can't learn all of what happens in one year. And so there's going to be things that dominate over the course of a school year, and you're learning history. So, I mean, I think a month like this is actually very helpful to an overall multicultural society to kind of emphasize, like, hey, everybody has contributed here. Everybody's a part of this. And so in a sense, you. I can see how once somebody can say, oh, well, this is going to single people out and make people feel less of a group. But it also, it's intended to. And it can work in the way, depending on how it's presented, to say, no, no, no, this is. We're going to take some time to talk about this group because they're a part of our whole group and them doing well is a part of us doing well, you know, now, again, but that does depend on how it's presented.
[00:08:42] Speaker B: Yeah, no, I think, look, I can't argue with that, right? I mean, you got your view, I got mine. It's not. I think we're pretty much aligned in that. I think it's just interesting to me in this, in this moment of, I would say, kind of the culture wars, right? And this idea of whether it's, you know, the wokeism quote unquote, or the cancel culture or a lot of the things that we've seen in our society, which we've discussed in various times, and there are various different types of discussions, discussions on this show that the idea of Black History Month, especially as this year, like, it's interesting, right? About what is it about a week or two ago? I mean, we're here on the 6th of February. So just before the month of Black History Month started, living in the state of Florida, we got word in terms of everybody through the news that our governor and his administration had taken issue.
[00:09:43] Speaker A: Our governor, we're in Florida, so our governor is Ron DeSantis.
[00:09:46] Speaker B: Ron DeSantis took issue with new AP courses that are at the high school level, advanced placement courses that deal with black History and the topic and certain things. And I just find it interesting that we have this dynamic where it seems like there's enough people in this country that don't want to delve into these topics of discussion. But at the same time, the country openly recognizes certain facts, like the fact that, like you said, every president since gerald Ford in 1976 has recognized and promoted Black History Month.
That we have.
[00:10:31] Speaker A: Well, let me say something on that, because I want to move to this. To this point. You know, let me just finish these two points. Well, go ahead.
[00:10:38] Speaker B: Two is just the idea. We have federal holidays celebrating like a human being, like Martin Luther King, or celebrating events like Juneteenth now. So in one way, we have our country as a nation saying, hey, these things are facts. They happen. We gotta honor this person or this event or so on. But then we have this culture within the country that says, I'm going to literally turn my receptiveness to this off because I don't like this topic and I don't want to discuss, you know, schools or any level. So I just find it interesting that we're living through this. Right?
[00:11:13] Speaker A: Well, no, yeah. I mean, living through it is. I mean, these are. These are the human things, though, you know, so, like, we. What we see when we learn about history a lot of times is kind of the reductive, all of that. We saw. We see the sausage, but the sausage getting made. We're living through the sausage being made in this timeframe. But to your point, what I think actually is more revealed here is that it's how this. And going back to what I was saying, it's how this stuff is presented. How is Black History Month presented? As people trying to be different, people trying not to fit in? Or is it presented as a part of the group? And this is one of the pieces. This is one of the cogs of the engine. And we're going to learn about the Pistons today, but the Pistons work with everything else. You know, it's. So that this thing works and how it's presented. What we're seeing right now, what we're living through a moment of right now, which we can't say this was the case 10 years ago or 20 years ago, which makes it very interesting, is that certain words involving black folks or black Americans, you know, American history or American. The black, Black history or whatever, have become trigger words in the culture wars. And so I think it's less about. This isn't an intellectual fight as much as it is, hey, we. If we want to rile Some people up, we have words now that are trigger words that if we associate these words with black history teaching, then people will reflexively react against the teaching of black history or reflect against or react against this class or whatever. And you were taught and I were talking offline in terms of how we see trigger words in our, you know, in societies and how they can evolve, how they can. And the words themselves can become detached from an actual definition that it may actually mean and just become a trigger. And it's like, okay, if you say this word that's just meaning to say, hey, you shouldn't like this, whatever I'm talking about, the word doesn't have to. I don't have to use the word accurately to its definition. The most common of these or, you know, one of the most prevalent over the last 50, 100 years is communist. When people call people communists. That's a trigger word that's in the United States. That's just saying, hey, you shouldn't like this person. That's not saying, hey, this person's economic agenda is this, this, this, this, and this. It's just don't like that person. It's a trigger word.
[00:13:28] Speaker B: So we're seeing old men, remember now, it's liberal or it's.
[00:13:32] Speaker A: That's a trigger word now, too. That's a. That. That's. So what we're seeing in the culture war is, is these trigger words. And so we have some now, whether it be crt, Black Lives Matter, whatever, these are trigger words that the definition. It, it doesn't have to. To say, hey, we got to get rid of this class because it has CRT in it. Doesn't have to have CRT in it. But all you're doing is associating this class bad.
[00:13:55] Speaker B: Well, let's explain that for a second because I think it's important for the audience and we've, you know.
[00:14:00] Speaker A: Well, let me ask you the question of where we're going, and then you can kind of get there as you, you, you, you explain that and then get there. Because the. What I want to ask you and where I want to go with this is just what do you make over this fight that, you know, particularly seems like Ron DeSantis is leading the charge here, you know, governor in Florida, that he seems to be bringing to a head about how black history can be taught, what can be taught and so forth. So get to that as you, you know, you, you, you go, you know, with what your point is.
[00:14:24] Speaker B: Well, I think, I think, you know, I'm going to be Very nuanced here, because this, again, complex kind of situation and discussions that we have here, because this has a lot to do with the culture of America throughout its history. And then we are human beings, all of us. Right. That are. So you've got a majority group and a minority group, as you've already identified. And, you know, there was a famous quote that I once read on the show, which I can't remember right now, but it says something to the effect of, you know, when the majority group has made a decision, it was by a French philosopher that basically, did they move on? Right. Like, it's like, okay, this is how we think. And now let's keep moving, you know.
[00:14:59] Speaker A: Once the majority moves on. And I mean, what tied with that, by the way, and this is how liberal democracies work, is that a constitution is actually in place, that the Constitution doesn't protect the majority from the minority. The Constitution protects varying. Not just. I'm not saying minority, black people. I'm just saying in general, minorities, minorities of thought, minorities of position, minorities of religion. Constitutions protect minorities from majorities because it's observed throughout time that in a society, the majorities, again, the majorities of thought, majorities of religion can be tyrannical if left to just say, hey, you guys, do what you want to do. And so, like, that's why all those things play in. But go ahead, please.
[00:15:42] Speaker B: Yeah. And so the thing is, is that.
And this is where I feel like we have. It's almost like a bipolar relationship with this topic in our country, because no one. I mean, obviously there's people out there that would say, I don't think this should be talked about at all. And I don't think anybody should talk about this stuff because I just don't like black people. Right. And I'm starting to respect those most people more than I respect a lot of other people, because at least they're honest.
[00:16:09] Speaker A: But we can. I think we can acknowledge that that's not a majority of. No, that's what I'm saying.
[00:16:13] Speaker B: And so this is what I'm saying, though, how it gets manipulated for the political game, which is. So you've got, let's say, to me, an extreme. That would be someone that really just says these people shouldn't have even a right to have their story told about how they were part of this beautiful country. Right. And I agree with you. I don't think that's a majority of people in this country. So let's go to. Then probably who is the majority or people that are Working people that are stressed out, people that don't have too much time to get in the weeds with all this stuff. But like you said, they have a certain feeling, they have a certain political lens that they see the world through or a culture that they've been raised in that they feel comfortable with. And so a lot of times that culture is based on information that was taught through, through the history of this country, which is, number one, admittedly Eurocentric. Number two, doesn't speak to things that some people would be uncomfortable with. Like, and it's not just about, let's say here we're talking Black History Month. This could be something talking about the massacre of Indian tribes at certain points in our history. And so when you mix in all this political stuff with the emotions of that, you have the ability for someone like our governor, Ron DeSantis, to say, hey, all these things are in this curriculum, and I don't think that this is good for your kids. And I'm going to read a quote from him here. He said, as he rolled out his opposition to some of these courses, he said, we want education, not indoctrination, arguing that the class is pushing an agenda on our kids. And I thought about it. You know, I agree with him. I don't disagree with him. And I'm not here to start explaining to someone like him why CRT isn't in the curriculum. And this is how you misunderstood it, because there's buzzwords in certain parts of the curriculum, like the word reparations. Right. That can offend someone. And so my point is, is that what I realized in preparing for this and also in understanding history, that we have all been indoctrinated all this time, but it's not with what was actually happened in history. We've been indoctrinated with things like the Lost Cause and certain narratives of American history. I was reading that.
[00:18:30] Speaker A: Glad you said that.
[00:18:31] Speaker B: No, there's 16 states, but let me just finish this and then I'll let you in. Sixteen states right now in their textbooks, in their curriculums say that the major cause of the Civil War was states rights, not slavery.
[00:18:44] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:18:45] Speaker B: So what I'm saying is I realized.
[00:18:46] Speaker A: Fight all the right of Confederates.
[00:18:49] Speaker B: So. So really we're all indoctrinated to something that is not what really happened. And that's where I'll pass it back. But that's what I started realizing is it's a fight against what we've been taught to believe versus what is actually.
[00:19:02] Speaker A: Preserve the current indoctrination.
[00:19:04] Speaker B: Correct.
[00:19:04] Speaker A: You know, and that's that. So that's a better way to put it.
[00:19:06] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:19:06] Speaker A: Yeah. And so, and I, to be fair, it is in a country's interest to teach history in a way that makes the next generation or whatever feel good about being a part of that country and to feel like they're on the right side of things. And that's in that. That's a interest of a nation to make people, to teach their people, hey, you want to be here? This place is good. And so it's understandable from the standpoint of you want to.
The thought of. We've heard this before. Nobody should feel guilt or feel bad about it. The issue is that that's not really like, if you're going to get out here and say, we're teaching history and making things available to learn, this is becoming like the Lost cause with the conservatives or, excuse me, with the Confederacy, where the Confederacy and losing the Civil War made Southerners feel a certain way. And so there was a concerted effort after that to retell what happened so that it made people feel better about it. And.
But I don't think that they would. Their justification, so to speak. We don't look back and say, hey, they were doing that to prevent indoctrination. You know, that would be dishonest. And in the same way that I think that Ron DeSantis is being dishonest here in the sense that he just wants it told a certain way, and he's like, hey, I don't want things that bring any kind of conflict into certain people's mind in terms of whether their group, and we can talk about what they see as their group is and how that could be harmful to building a nation. But their group feeling guilty. Because this is the thing, and this is the question you ask oftentimes in our shows, is, is America a race or a religion? Or race or a religion, you could say, or a nation based on the Constitution, based on principles. And the Founding Fathers, in the documents, their writings would say, it's a nation based on principle actions, not necessarily as much. And then even so now it's like, okay, people. You'll hear people say, hey, I am a Christian nationalist that's saying that they think America is based on a religion. Or people will say, hey, America is based on this group having control and so forth. And so that's really the underlying fight is, okay, are we going to be about principles, about equality? If we're about equality, then you just. You should learn all kinds of history and you should feel good about the Fact that we as a nation have been able to make all this work over time and get better and better and better in terms of our aim of equality. Or you could just feel good about other stuff and then. Yeah, learning some things in history. If you want to feel good just solely about the color of your skin, then learning some things in history might make you feel bad about that. But again, your choice then is to say, hey, I identify as American because of what I look like, not because I believe in the Constitution or because I believe in the principles espoused by it.
[00:22:01] Speaker B: Yeah. And so here's the thing. I want to go back to something you said, which is that, you know, there's some people and I think, you know, unfortunately, our governor falls into that category based on what he said is, you know, that believe that they're. They're helping kids by basically shielding them from seeing history and historical facts. They're somehow helping them to not feel bad about themselves in the current, you know, life that they live as kids in school. Now, a couple things I want to address there. Number one is I think that's an absolute BS argument. I think that everybody should be able to learn things without taking it personal. Right. That would be like.
[00:22:43] Speaker A: Also, it goes to how it's presented again. Oh, go ahead, go ahead.
[00:22:46] Speaker B: Let's just. Because, you know, I'm ready to roll on this one.
[00:22:49] Speaker A: It.
[00:22:50] Speaker B: To me, it would be like, let's say that there was the same setup in the country of Germany with states and governors and all that. I don't know how they're really set up in that way, but let's say there was an equivalent of a governor in a German state that said, I'm going to prevent now the teaching of the Holocaust because there may be German kids who had grandparents or great grandparents that might have been members of the Nazi party. I don't want them feeling embarrassed or that they're being singled out when we talk about this history. I don't think that most of people hearing that would accept that as a reason to not teach on the outside.
[00:23:24] Speaker A: Most people, like in our country.
[00:23:25] Speaker B: Correct.
[00:23:26] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:23:26] Speaker B: We'll just say, obviously this person just doesn't want people to know about the Holocaust. Right. They don't want. They themselves seem to be embarrassed about maybe there's atrocities. So now they're gonna push that embarrassment on their kids and tell their kids that this shouldn't be. It just basically what, again, the culture we've been living in and as we discussed, was the indoctrination post Civil War and Post reconstruction and all that, which is don't talk about it. And this is why, for example, I'm going to read some stuff, quote from some of the stuff here. Teachers may introduce Malcolm X but not read his speeches. Mention soul singer Marvin Gaye, but not discuss his what's Going on lyrics, or point out Rosewood, Florida, or Tulsa, Oklahoma, en masse, but not talk about the racial atrocities that occurred there. That would be like pointing out the city of Auschwitz or, you know, the camp on a map, but being prevented from saying what happened there. Yeah, and so the point is. And that's what I mean is, I think we'd all find it offensive if someone said, you know, you can. You can say the name Auschwitz, but you can't talk about the context of why you're even talking about it. And my point is, is that this has been what's happened in American history.
[00:24:37] Speaker A: Well, yeah. I mean, I think it's clear to any neutral observer or anyone who wants to look at this objectively that this isn't meant to apply universally. Like you. You're going to stop teaching Manifest Destiny because it would make a Native American child feel bad about that. Like, I mean, come on. Like.
[00:24:53] Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, that's a great point.
[00:24:54] Speaker A: Two stories. Yeah, everything has two side. Every story has two sides. Every battle has a winner. And you know what?
[00:25:01] Speaker B: We shouldn't teach about women's suffrage because as a man, I'm just gonna feel.
[00:25:04] Speaker A: Because men are like, oh, my voting power got diluted, or I'm gonna feel terrible they're trying to prevent women from voting and so forth. So it's. I mean, in this. But it's about. That's why.
[00:25:13] Speaker B: It's just stupid when you break it down.
[00:25:15] Speaker A: Yeah, but it's about how this stuff is presented, though, again, because you can present things. If you want to take the quote, unquote, American point of view, then the enslaver, you wouldn't identify with the enslaver. You would identify with the abolitionist. And so that's the American, you know, like the. If you're. If you're a bad, you're John Brown. And so it's. People don't want to identify. They want to identify with the enslaver. They want to identify with the. The. The. The purveyor of Jim Crow in that sense. And that's. For whatever reason, there are many reasons that could be. It could get into. You know, some people are just wired more in a hierarchical sense. And that's just. That's how human minds work. You know, in terms in societies, but not going to get into all that. But just in general, like how this stuff, you can present history in a way too, because again, I acknowledge that it is. There's a good idea for a nation to tell history in a way that makes people want to be a part of that nation. But again, it's, what part? How are you presenting that stuff? What about the nation is worth being a part of right now? Essentially, Desantis point is that the reason why we want you to feel good about being a part of this nation is because you're white. And what I'm saying is that how about we present things in a way that people can feel good about being a part of this nation because of the Constitution, because of freedom of speech, because of the Second Amendment, you know, the right to bear arms, because we're able to make all this work. The reason America is objectively exceptional is because it's been able to have a multicultural democracy like this. This doesn't happen in history. This is not how things worked throughout most of history. And so that is something you can teach a history about that everybody can feel good about. But again, this is where you want to emphasize. So I mean, I. I want to ask you, before we get out on this topic, is just what do you think's at stake here? You know, like, do you think we can end up in 20 years with Black history, or at least large parts of it, like Tulsa, like, Like Ro. Like, you know, those Rosewood, like Wilmington, North Carolina, just stuff that's not taught anymore that you can't. You can't find? Or do you think that. Or do you. Do you buy, you know, like that, hey, this is kind of just a blip in part of the culture wars. And, you know, do you think that. What do you think? You know, what do you think?
[00:27:23] Speaker B: I think. I think it's the latter. I think. I think, you know, this kind of reaction to the demographic shifts and to what you and I probably would consider the long arc of progress in this country when it comes to equality is. Comes up every, probably couple generations.
You and I haven't really lived through it this way because probably prior to this moment, in the last decade was civil rights era of the 60s.
But I just think, look, the way I thought of it, even preparing today, right? If you look at it, there was that type of energy in this country, led to a civil war, you know, around 150, 160 years ago.
Then, you know, that led to ending slavery. Then you had a period of time where you know, it went backwards a bit with the Jim Crow era and all that, but then you had 100 years after the Civil War, the 1960s, which saw minorities have even more rights.
[00:28:21] Speaker A: In this country, and it didn't require an out and out war.
[00:28:24] Speaker B: Yeah, that didn't require a 7 or so. That's progress. And then, you know, we've continued to see that kind of incremental progress over the decades without again, massive conflict in the country. And so I think, you know, it's another. I thought of, you know, for some reason, and this is totally unrelated, but my brain just was, was kept thinking about President Trump, Colin Kaepernick and the NFL in 2017.
And we could all see the kind of racial and cultural overtones that all that stuff symbolized. And again, as much as, you know, the attempt was done, I figured Kaepernick's 10,000 times richer than he ever would have been afterwards. And the NFL is making more money and we have next weekend, the first time in history two black quarterbacks facing off. And so the point I'm making is, you know, as much as people try and stop this march of progress, it continues. I also find it interesting that we have these competing interests in a country that has the First Amendment, that the state can't suppress free speech.
So that's what I figure is that number one, what do people do?
[00:29:37] Speaker A: And you just read a bunch of things that the restrictions are trying to.
[00:29:41] Speaker B: I know, can't say this, can't say that. That's what I mean. So at some point they're going to lose because. Because the Constitution is going to win in the court, hopefully.
[00:29:50] Speaker A: Well, what I think it's another one of these things actually that just further, and I say this in a literal sense, not in a figurative sense, but just that further divides the country. I mean, and this is our federalism system, so to speak. As you pointed out, 16 states teach, you know, like that slave or that slavery wasn't the cause of the Civil War. And so what I see more so is that a lot of places, most places hopefully will continue on and trying to get history more accurate, trying to do a more accurate picture, trying to increase understanding amongst their fellow citizenry, not build up one part of the citizen citizenry so that they can't empathize or see the see anybody else's point of view.
I think that that'll happen hopefully in most places. But there will be some places basically that want to go the lost cause route, you know, and that will teach, you know, like you find Textbooks, I'm sure today that teach that, you know, the slave owners and the slaves were all buddy, buddy. And, you know, it was such a. You know, they were. There was a harmless system. And, you know, the blacks, people were.
[00:30:52] Speaker B: Better off in three square meals, man. It wasn't.
[00:30:54] Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, I'm sure you'll find. I mean, and so I think it'll be one of those places where you'll see a divergent divergence there, where some places they'll do that and they'll. They won't teach black history at all. You know, like, again, it won't accept that black people were slaves and then they weren't, you know, something like that.
You know, other places they'll have a more, you know, like a more complete understanding. But the thing is, and this is the last point I want to make on this, is that as long as something like this can be tied. I talked earlier about those buzzwords and be. And then be tied to an emotional reaction. This becomes a way to seek power through a passionate voter base. Because there are people who DeSantis is speaking to that feel that he can make them feel, really feel again, feel. Not thinking, feel really strong about this and therefore shore up more support for him. Support that's not dependent on him doing a good job at anything. As long as he triggers these feelings in there, he's unaccountable in terms of their support for him. They'll support him because they make him feel a certain way or he makes them feel a certain way. So I think as long as that is available and that's a human thing, that you'll always have people playing to these kind of things and trying to create these buzzword and these trigger words that you, hey, I can. I can get people, hey, there's something happening here. I'll say this word and they will. It's like. It's like hypnosis. You snap back over, oh, you said what? Crt. Oh, we got it. Like, and then it becomes, you know, becomes that. So. But no, I mean, the second topic we wanted to Discuss today was ChatGPT, AI coming to get you. And so now this is a language model. It's artificial intelligence language model. And basically, it. This thing, you can ask it questions, you can ask it to do things, you know, from a tech standpoint. And it can do it. And it seems pretty remarkable, you know, like, I've seen professors talk about it, you know, just people in the education field saying, hey, this thing can write, in many respects, as good as. Or as good or Better than a lot of my students, you know, looking at high school or whatever. So what, what has been your thought or, you know, your thoughts on what we're seeing unfold with Chat GPT and just this ability for AI to hey, write me a poem and they can produce a poem or hey, explain this to me. And it can, it can explain it back to you. And that's not always right, but its level of accuracy is high enough that it has people. Has people stirring.
[00:33:11] Speaker B: I'm just laughing because I know we don't like to blend our two topics, but I can't resist because I'm just thinking, well, if this thing gets good enough that it could start like answering kids questions and they're going to have to figure out how to get this thing not to talk about black history when someone asks it a question. Right?
[00:33:25] Speaker A: Well, yeah, go, go see what does it give you when you say what was the cause of the Civil war?
There's your time.
[00:33:32] Speaker B: People start banning AI now because they're saying the wrong thing to them. So anyway, it's fascinating because remember, so this was only about a year ago or so I think we did the show, we did a Part two wasn't that long, but on that Google engineer who got suspended because he was talking to some AI and he kind of like fell to the eye, was coming alive. And now I'm starting to think maybe he was just testing the.
[00:34:01] Speaker A: He called it sentient.
[00:34:02] Speaker B: Yeah, he was testing the beta version of.
[00:34:05] Speaker A: Now this is open AI. This is a different group than Google. Google has their own stuff going on. OpenAI.
[00:34:10] Speaker B: They're all working on stuff.
[00:34:11] Speaker A: Yeah, OpenAI is affiliated with Microsoft and they're not the same, but they are using a Microsoft. Because this type of stuff takes a lot of computer power. Because what it's doing is to understand context, to be able to. When I say conversational, if you ask three questions in a row, it can build on answers. It can kind of understand what you guys are talking about and stay in that lane. And not just every query is separate. So it takes a lot. Yeah, this is big.
[00:34:38] Speaker B: So what I. Because I thought about also, I mean, I've mentioned this on the show various times when we've had this type of discussion. The movie with Joaquin Phoenix from, you know, her, you have where, you know, he basically falls in love with an AI system. And the more I see stuff like this, the more I totally believe that stuff's gonna happen at some point. Meaning where the AI, because this is now chatgpt where we can ask it Questions and it can type back, wait till they perfect the voiceover and all that, where you can basically have a companion with you at all times. Just have like a buddy and say, hey, man, you know, I was thinking about this or that. What do you think? And then, you know, the.
[00:35:16] Speaker A: Yeah, like on Wakanda Forever, you know, like the machine. The machine AI that the new Black Panther had. I guess I don't want to do too much of a spoiler, but.
[00:35:27] Speaker B: No, just from our first topic, you got me on pins and needles that I wasn't sure if we're supposed to talk about that or not, but. Yeah.
[00:35:32] Speaker A: You ever get you banned talking about Wakanda Forever, man?
[00:35:35] Speaker B: We'll get banned from the podcast sites.
But anyway, no, but that's the thing. I find it fascinating that we are here in kind of this moment of technology, and between this and the deep fakes and all that, I think I can totally see a line of that. This stuff isn't alive. Right. But I think over time, this is gonna have us more questioning the idea of sentient ness or whatever. I can say that word like sentient. What's. What's. What's really gonna differentiate something that is kind of alive versus something that's not? If, like. Yeah, kind of like the droids on Star wars, like a C3PO, you know, when they're pulling a character like that's arm off and he's. And he's yelling that he's hurting, you know, it's like, is he really hurting or not? I don't know, but it seems like he is. And these are the kind of things got me thinking. This thing kind of seems like it's alive, but I know it's not.
[00:36:30] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:36:31] Speaker B: So it's.
[00:36:31] Speaker A: Well, yeah, I mean, because this still is a pre. When you think full conversational, this thing isn't thinking about it in the way that you would think from an intelligence standpoint. It just has such a strong and comprehensive grasp of language that it's able to interact like this.
And it's fascinating. I mean, like, I was. We'll have some stuff in the show, notes on this, but that. That this, the chat GPT, they're saying that when you're looking at the, like the lsat, the admissions test for the. For. For law schools, it scored in the 40th percentile on that, meaning it did better than 40% of, you know, of the applicants or people who were taking it, scoring high on the. What would be another one, 78% on New York State's high School chemistry exams, like in the multiple choice, like this thing is its ability to grasp all this language and pull context out is amazing.
[00:37:26] Speaker B: That's a low score. This guy's got access to like the entire Internet in two seconds.
He's got an unfair advantage.
[00:37:33] Speaker A: Well, yeah, But I mean, 78, man, that's passing.
That thing will get. That'll get you a high C. And so it's amazing to me that you can have that much grasp because it's still, it's still limited by existing computing power, you know, so it can access all that stuff instantaneously. So it has ways to be efficient. So, I mean, when you think of how, you know, language and writing and so forth is how we interact with each other to such a large degree, you know, and so that we're building machines now that are starting to be able to approximately maybe half or what, what like the capabilities of about half of us. Like, I think this is a very big deal. Like, I don't if. If this thing is as smart or not. Again, it's not smart. But if this thing can interact with other human beings as good as a third of people, that says a lot. And that does go into the thing. Your question of, okay, well, when do we start breaking down sentience versus, you know, like just overly having a good ability to pull keywords out and then identify what is important there. And so I'm fascinated by it. I'm also fascinated. I think it's is. There's, there's another one. There's a one that generates graphics. I think that's Dall E. And that one is fascinating as well, where you can say, create a picture. And so this one's creating visual. And so like where AI is going, where it can basically take our verbal commands or, you know, textual commands and then turn them into something that potentially is useful, is. I mean, we're heading there right now. We're there. And it is. Its capability has already surpassed a good chunk of humanity, at least in the conceptual part.
[00:39:22] Speaker B: Yeah, no, as you're talking, it makes me realize, like, imagine when kind of quantum computing kind of gets more out in the mainstream and more perfected.
[00:39:33] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:39:33] Speaker B: Something like this, I mean, that's where something like this GPT on a quantum computer could blow our mind. I mean, that's what I mean.
[00:39:40] Speaker A: Like, it increases the compute power so much.
[00:39:43] Speaker B: Yeah. You know, that might give it the ability to move as quickly as our thoughts can move through our brain and that again, is it going to be alive in our definition of life? Probably not. But would we mistake it for maybe something alive? Could we begin? Because here's what I could see in some. I mean, this is like the dystopian type of, you know, kind of futuristic stuff that you would see in movies, Right.
A chat GPT on a quantum computer that starts sounding like it's really making some sense.
[00:40:15] Speaker A: Or, see, this thing now is making sense.
[00:40:17] Speaker B: No, but what I'm saying is, or people begin to believe there's somebody, like a Wizard of Oz, like a person controlling it. This could become like a Qanon on steroids. Meaning. No, I mean, I'm not saying that it's a joke. I just mean, like, people could start, like, treating this AI thing like some sort of. Like it's.
[00:40:35] Speaker A: It's like an oracle. Yeah.
[00:40:36] Speaker B: Like this thing needs to be followed and all that. And who knows?
[00:40:41] Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, like, that's what I mean. Like, criminal law is like, okay, you don't go to a judge. You go to the AI system.
[00:40:47] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:40:47] Speaker A: Type in all the facts. And then they say, yeah, this person was 55% chance they did it. And it was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, you're gonna send me to jail.
[00:40:54] Speaker B: But, you know, it's interesting. I would trust a computer over humans based on everything we know, with righteous mind and all that. But the bias is. The only thing I wouldn't trust is that a human could actually get in there and hack it. That would be the thing that would. Of course. Well, yeah, I need more trusting of going in front of a computer, being like, okay, did the guy do it or not?
[00:41:11] Speaker A: And remember when we. We did one of the Gladwell books and they talked about how judges are more harsh right before lunch and right before the end of the day because they're hungry?
[00:41:19] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:41:20] Speaker A: Like, you don't have to worry about that. Like, oh, man, I'm glad I'm here at 9.
[00:41:23] Speaker B: Or even things like more. More attractive people tend to get more lenient sentences just because, you know, this is. You know, it's just like little people work. Yeah, that's how people work. Exactly. So it's like I would say, yeah, a computer probably could run humans better than humans can run humans. I just still wouldn't want to be like, I still would always have a suspicion. What if somebody who started that program put some kind of order 66, but.
[00:41:46] Speaker A: Their biases are going to. I mean, that's the thing. When you program anything, the biases of the programmer end up coming through. Or if this thing is learning through what's on the Internet. Now, the Internet's not full of factual information. There's a lot of BS on the Internet. And so. And actually that's one of the ways that this thing can get tripped up is it can get onto the wrong kind of, you know, it can get onto the wrong kind of tail, basically, and follow that. Now there's two areas that, you know, before we wrap up, there's two areas.
[00:42:11] Speaker B: Hold on. I'm just disappointed you didn't catch my Easter egg.
[00:42:14] Speaker A: Okay.
[00:42:15] Speaker B: When I threw under order 66. Come on.
[00:42:17] Speaker A: Oh, okay, okay, I got you, but go ahead. Well, I'm over here. I got. Yeah, I'm looking at the time.
But no, there's two areas that I, I thought about with this and it, it, it's. And it makes sense because I have a background in computer science and then I'm a, I'm an intellectual property attorney. So first was programming, programming computers. Like, if you can just say eventually, conceivably this chat GPT or some kind of in its lineage, you could just tell a machine, this is what I want to program. I want, this is what I want the program to do. And it'll write the code. And so then that really lowers the barrier for as far as at least some types of programming, which could explode the amount of options that are available from an app standpoint and what we can do with our computers and, you know, phones and all that stuff. The second thing, which I guess would be somewhat related to that, is that works created by a machine aren't be able. You can't protect those with copyright. So anything you do through if you have ChatGPT prepare this or that, you don't have a copyright on it. Normally, if you prepare something, you have a copyright on that. That's how it works. You as the author, you create it. Unless you assign the rights, you have.
[00:43:28] Speaker B: The Copyright or does OpenAI have the rights?
[00:43:30] Speaker A: No, it's machine created. They have the copyright to whatever code is running the chat GPT.
[00:43:37] Speaker B: But if ChatGPT creates something on its own, they can't say on it. Okay, interesting.
[00:43:41] Speaker A: No, no, no. Copyright protects the work of humans.
[00:43:44] Speaker B: Okay?
[00:43:45] Speaker A: So unless there's somebody behind this is.
[00:43:48] Speaker B: All going to be new law. They're going to be, you guys making a bunch of money suing each other over clients who are saying, this is my one. Oh, this.
[00:43:55] Speaker A: A computer probably will evolve because like, for example, computer programming, like software code is protected by copyright. And that wasn't the case in 1890. You know, once people started programming computers, they went and changed the law and say, okay, well, software is something. But what are software is? Well, let me, let me say the software is a work of expression in the same way that writing a novel is a work of expression in the eyes of the copyright. And so but that's something that was updated. They had novels in 1890. They didn't have software programs in 1890. And so they had to update the law to say software is a part of that. So we'll see basically whether, you know, the courts wouldn't necessarily do that. It hopefully would be Congress there are it our inoperative branch of government or.
[00:44:41] Speaker B: Maybe we can just get these computers to write the laws. How about that?
[00:44:44] Speaker A: Like I said, going back down that road again.
[00:44:47] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:44:47] Speaker A: Oh, well, no, we can wrap from there, man. We appreciate everybody for joining us on this episode of Call Like I see it. Subscribe to the Podcast Rate it. Review us. Tell us what you think. Share with a friend. Until next time, I'm James Keys.
[00:45:02] Speaker B: I'll be Chief Palpatine to today. That'll be mine. All right. Whoever wants to look up order 66 will get be able to so they.
[00:45:09] Speaker A: Can get two days Easter egg.
[00:45:11] Speaker B: Get my Easter egg. I'm Chief Palpatine.
[00:45:14] Speaker A: All right, we'll talk to.
