Young Woman Standing Before a Dynamic Digital Screen, Immersed in Internet Visualization. Internet Cyberspace with Web Content, Icons, Animated Stream of Online Applications and Entertainment

Everything Is Fake Now — And It’s Worse Than You Think

Artificial Intelligence

Fake accounts

Food

Fraud

illegal immigrants

Matt Walsh

Music

Opinion

scams

OpenAI announced on Tuesday that it plans to shut down the video creation platform Sora, which launched in 2024. The company did not give a reason for their decision.
“We’re saying goodbye to Sora. To everyone who created with Sora, shared it, and built community around it: thank you. What you made with Sora mattered, and we know this news is disappointing,” OpenAI’s Sora team said in a <a href="https://x.com/soraofficialapp/status/2036532795984715896">statement</a> shared on social media.
&#8220;We’ll share more soon, including timelines for the app and API and details on preserving your work.”
This news comes on the heels of Disney announcing a major $1 billion partnership agreement with the tech company, which would have allowed OpenAI to use characters from Star Wars, Pixar, and Marvel franchises in its Sora video generator.
Much ado was made about users having the opportunity to create “fan-inspired” videos with Disney’s licensed characters, like Mickey Mouse, with Disney+ adding some of those Sora-generated videos as part of the exclusive deal.
But that’s all reportedly off the table now as Disney ends its partnership with OpenAI.
“As the nascent AI field advances rapidly, we respect OpenAI’s decision to exit the video generation business and to shift its priorities elsewhere,” Disney <a href="https://variety.com/2026/digital/news/openai-shutting-down-sora-video-disney-1236698277/">said</a> in a statement, per Variety. “We appreciate the constructive collaboration between our teams and what we learned from it, and we will continue to engage with AI platforms to find new ways to meet fans where they are while responsibly embracing new technologies that respect IP and the rights of creators.”
Hollywood was up in arms over the newest release of the second-generation Sora model in September, with many critics saying the realistic videos posed a threat to human talent and opened the floodgates for massive copyright infringement and deepfakes.
Now social media users are weighing in on the abrupt closure, speculating that Sora could be facing a massive lawsuit. That rumor has not been confirmed by the company. 
OpenAI, led by CEO Sam Altman, will not give up AI video generation completely. They are just abandoning the standalone Sora app for reasons that are yet to be revealed.

Walt Disney World

Disney’s Big Bet For Fans Just Fell Apart Before It Even Began

Big Tech

Disney

Entertainment

General

OpenAI

U.S.

For now, Facebook is still technically called Meta. But the “metaverse,” Mark Zuckerberg’s ambitious virtual reality project, is in shambles. Tech outlets <a href="https://www.engadget.com/ar-vr/meta-isnt-shutting-down-its-vr-metaverse-after-all-165520696.html">reported</a> last week that the company would be sunsetting Horizon Worlds, its VR social media platform. Then CTO Andrew Bosworth clarified that Horizon Worlds would remain operational, even if users could expect little in the way of updates or new content. The parallel reality that Zuckerberg invited his clientele to dream of will linger quietly on — like the mostly forgotten game &#8220;The Sims,&#8221; that nerds of a certain age sometimes spin up for old time’s sake, except with real people pretending to be virtual instead of the other way around. Meta’s rebrand was perhaps a bit premature.
But then, it wasn’t so much the “Meta” part that grated. It was the “Verse”: the all-encompassing and boundlessly presumptuous claim about how life would be from now on. Pretensions to metaversality were part of the enthusiasm for “Web 3,” a supposedly epochal transition from a world of siloed apps and websites to a paradise of digital interconnectivity. It was one of those tech projects that consists of a doomsday scenario presented unblinkingly as a sales pitch. In &#8220;Snow Crash,&#8221; a 1992 cyberpunk fantasia, the novelist Neal Stephenson gave the name “metaverse” to a digital world that his characters would escape into when socioeconomic conditions conspired to make their embodied lives unbearable.
Zuckerberg, striding confidently through a sea of early adopters wearing insectoid VR helmet-goggles for a photo op, didn’t seem to notice how viscerally unappealing the whole thing was. He comes across as totally deaf to these sorts of concerns, although maybe acting that way is part of his job. It also has to be said how profoundly the mood back then was affected by COVID-19, which spiked people’s screen time and created the impression that everything was getting ported to the cloud.
<div id="attachment_1063987" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1063987" class="size-large wp-image-1063987" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-1236189437-864x576.jpg" alt="Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer of Facebook Inc., speaks in a virtual Horizon Home environment during the virtual Facebook Connect event, where the company announced its rebranding as Meta, in New York, U.S., on Thursday, Oct. 28, 2021. A major theme at the annual conference will be the company's ambitions for the so-called metaverse, a new digital space that it believes will supplant smartphone apps as the primary form of online interaction. Photographer: Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-1236189437-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-1236189437-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-1236189437-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-1236189437.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images</div>
Lots of things were, but it was silly not to expect an imminent counter-revolution once people grew disgusted with the effects of too much scrolling. In the first round of mass layoffs that followed his pandemic hiring spree, Zuckerberg regretfully <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2022/11/mark-zuckerberg-layoff-message-to-employees/">acknowledged</a> that he had seen the rush of users to the site and “predicted this would be a permanent acceleration.” Whoopsie. The four most foolhardy words in the English language are “if present trends continue.”
Present trends generally do not continue. In &#8220;<a href="https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/shoshana-zuboff/the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism/9781478947271/?lens=publicaffairs">The Age of Surveillance Capitalism</a>,&#8221; the social psychologist Shoshanna Zuboff used the word “inevitabilism” to describe how technologists labor to make their designs seem inevitable “when they are actually meticulously calculated and lavishly funded means to self-dealing commercial ends.” What Zuboff called “the prediction imperative” puts tech companies in “the reality business,” where profit models depend on passing off corporate aspirations as unalterable, world-historical developments that must and will take place. Then the only question becomes whether you’ll get on board or, in the words of Ebenezer Scrooge from the 1951 adaptation of Dickens’s &#8220;A Christmas Carol,&#8221; “be crushed under with the weak and the infirm.” This is why product launches so often look and sound like something out of Hegel’s Lectures on the Philosophy of History, and why emissaries from the c-suite tend to talk like Thanos from &#8220;Avengers: Endgame&#8221;: &#8220;I.Am.Inevitable.&#8221;
What I want to propose is that inevitabilism is neither unique to tech nor especially modern. It’s just the standard advertising strategy for aspirants to global power. In 1817, anticipating the arrival in London of a colossal pharaonic statue from Egypt, Percy Shelley and Horace Smith embarked on a friendly competition to write a poem on the theme of monarchic pride. Shelley won with “Ozymandias,” a sonnet on the ruins of a dead king’s towering monument whose “vast and trunkless legs of stone” stand on a pedestal inscribed with the words “‘My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings. / Look on my works ye mighty, and despair!’ / Nothing beside remains. Round the decay / Of that Colossal Wreck, boundless and bare, / The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
The real Ozymandias was Ramesses II, god-king of Egypt’s mighty New Kingdom. The Greek version of his name, which Shelley used for his title, came from the royal epithet he adopted at his coronation: Usermaatre Setepenre. It means roughly “Strong Justice and Chosen one of Ra,” the Sun God. Shelley neither invented nor exaggerated Ozymandias’ claims to ultimate power. The statue’s inscription in the poem is a rough paraphrase of a real one quoted by the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus: “King of Kings am I, Osymandias. If anyone would know how great I am and where I lie, let him surpass one of my works.”
Ozymandias, Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Ashurbanipal&#8230;they came and they went. It used to be standard practice for imperial monarchs to boast of their sacred, eternal, and universal dominion. The fiction is appealing because it offers things people crave: permanence, stability, order, and certainty about the future. It’s tragic because, as Shelley observed, none of these are things that even very good men can guarantee. The sands of time’s desert are littered with trunkless legs. Nothing beside remains.
Understand these things, and you understand the politics of the Old Testament. The constant refrain of the Hebrew Prophets was that people look for eternity in the wrong places. “Put not your trust in princes”: again and again, the Jews of ancient Israel were invited to observe the wreckage of dynasties whose total dominion was once depicted — plausibly, at the time — as inevitable.
As it winds down its VR program, Meta will be diverting its resources and attention toward Artificial Intelligence. AI technology has so far proven vastly more useful and workable than the metaverse. It seems unlikely that we’ll look back on it as a passing fancy. At the same time, the predictions about the world AI will make — its powers to transform the universe, or come to life, or usurp God — have all the flavor of inevitabilism.
The same people who went all-in on the metaverse have moved on with undiminished confidence to telling us that AI will change everything, everywhere, all at once, that the whole thing is a fait accompli, that it’s pointless to speak of exercising restraint. “Look on our works, ye mighty, and despair.” I submit that we will continue to fall for this routine, chasing like hamsters after the next forever, just as long as we expect a company or a king to secure the future of the universe. If we want eternity, we will have to look elsewhere.
* * *
Spencer A. Klavan is co-host, with his father Andrew Klavan, of the “Klavans on the Culture” podcast. He is associate editor of the Claremont Review of Books and author, most recently, of &#8220;Light of the Mind, Light of the World: Illuminating Science Through Faith.&#8221;
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Day Two of MWC Barcelona 2023

The Metaverse Was Never Inevitable

Books

Facebook

Literature

Mark Zuckerberg

Silicon Valley

Technology

The horror novel “Shy Girl” is being pulled from publication in the United States and won’t be sold anymore in the U.K. due to suspected use of artificial intelligence (AI) by the author, Mia Ballard.
Hachette Book Group, one of the largest publishers in the United States, announced its decision on Thursday, per <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/19/books/shy-girl-book-ai.html">The New York Times</a>.
 “Hachette remains committed to protecting original creative expression and storytelling,” a company spokeswoman told the outlet, noting that authors are required to disclose any use of AI for writing before submitting their work.
“Shy Girl” was slated to be released later this spring. Ballard responded to the accusations via email, denying the allegations. 
“This controversy has changed my life in many ways, and my mental health is at an all-time low, and my name is ruined for something I didn’t even personally do,” she told the NYT.
The book has sold about 1,800 copies in the U.K. so far. As of Thursday, it was removed from Amazon and the Hachette website.
According to the Goodreads description, the novel is about a girl who decides to live as a man’s pet. Ballard initially self-published the book in 2025.
“Lonely, broke and depressed with a serious case of OCD, Gia finds herself at a crossroads when financial troubles lead her to Nathan, a mysterious and affluent man she encounters on a sugar dating website. Desperate for a solution, Gia is intrigued by Nathan&#8217;s unconventional offer: in exchange for living as his devoted pet, all of her debts will be erased. But the longer Gia is in captivity, the more animalistic she becomes,” the description says. 
While AI-generated writing isn’t always easy to recognize, many readers have begun to notice certain patterns and call it out. “Shy Girl” was no exception, as many reviewers noticed aspects that they said indicate AI did the writing. 
“I am quite certain that this was written by ChatGPT,” one reviewer who gave the book one star wrote. “As an editor, I&#8217;ve read a few specifically ChatGPT written books, and this has not only all the hallmarks, but some specific repeated phrases that I&#8217;ve read in other ChatGPT works … If it&#8217;s not AI, and I&#8217;m truly quite sure that it is, then this author needs to be ruthlessly edited. Every noun is preceded by a flaccid adjective, every action is followed by a repetitive, boring simile.”
Two months ago, YouTube personality Frankie&#8217;s Shelf released a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbeKTa5xhZo">video</a> on the book called &#8220;I&#8217;m pretty sure this book is AI slop,” which took a deep dive into the allegations. It received more than one million views and 44,000 likes. 
This move comes as the controversy over the use of AI across multiple industries, including entertainment and Hollywood, remains a hot topic of debate.

Robot’s hand holding a pencil.

Publisher Yanks Horror Novel Over Suspected AI Use

United States

The following is an edited transcript excerpt from <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mks-ep-1935-sub?elementPosition=7&amp;row=6&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">The Michael Knowles Show</a>.
* * *
Val Kilmer is dead. Hollywood now wants to put him in another movie anyway.
Not through footage he had already completed. Not through a role he finished before his death. Through artificial intelligence.
We are told this is a tribute. It is not a tribute. It is necromancy.
Yes, necromancy. And no, that is not just a melodramatic way of saying I dislike the technology. Taking a dead actor, reconstructing his face and voice with AI, and then putting words in his mouth is not ordinary filmmaking. It is an attempt to conjure a human presence from beyond the grave. Not the man himself, of course, but his image, his shade, his likeness. That is exactly what makes it so grotesque.
I know the objection. No, it’s not. Necromancy would mean literally bringing someone back from the dead. This is just technology. This is just creating an image that looks and sounds like him.
No. That is not really what necromancy has ever meant in practice. 
When people go to a psychic and try to conjure the dead, they are not expecting a flesh-and-blood man to walk back into the room. They expect a voice, a shadow, a movement, a shape, an apparition. They expect an image that gives the illusion of presence. That is what they are after. And that is exactly what this technology offers: not resurrection, but simulation. Not life, but a convincing imitation of it.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mks-ep-1935-sub?elementPosition=7&amp;row=6&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-1054531 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-768x128.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1536x256.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1.jpg 1800w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
That is why the distinction does not save it. It condemns it.
A human being is not merely a face, or a voice, or a recognizable pattern of speech. A man is not reducible to a catalog of gestures and expressions that can be fed into a machine and reproduced on command. A man is body and soul. A body without a soul is a corpse. A soul without a body is a spirit. A digital imitation is neither. It is not the man. It is not Val Kilmer.
Val Kilmer lived, and then he died. That is the truth. And when you start creating AI performances that ask audiences to forget that truth, you are doing more than making a movie. You are teaching people to deny death.
That is one of the deepest temptations of modern life. So much of liberal modernity is about denying mortality, denying limits, denying the fixed realities of the human condition. It is about gathering to ourselves powers that do not belong to us. It is about pretending we can master time, history, memory, identity, even death itself. It is about maximizing human autonomy until man no longer receives the world as a creature under God, but tries to re-engineer it as his own private project.
<div id="attachment_1062869" style="width: 893px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1062869" class="size-large wp-image-1062869" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-607408752-883x576.jpg" alt="American actors Val Kilmer and Tom Cruise on the set of Top Gun, directed by Tony Scott. (Photo by Paramount Pictures/Sunset Boulevard/Corbis via Getty Images)" width="883" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-607408752-883x576.jpg 883w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-607408752-300x196.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-607408752-768x501.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-607408752.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 883px) 100vw, 883px" />Paramount Pictures/Sunset Boulevard/Corbis via Getty Images</div>
That is what makes this more than a Hollywood gimmick. This is not just another strange special effect or another morally neutral technological advance. It is part of a much larger effort to flatten reality and replace it with manipulation. It invites us to believe that the dead are not really gone, that personhood is just data, that memory can be commercialized into presence, and that all boundaries exist to be crossed so long as the software is good enough.
And it will get good enough. That is part of the problem. If the technology improves, people will look at that screen and think, on some level, that they are really seeing Val Kilmer. Maybe not literally. Maybe they will know, abstractly, that it is AI. But emotionally, imaginatively, culturally, the effect will be the same. The dead man will appear to live again. And when that happens over and over, decade after decade, it will change the way we think about death itself.
It will teach us that death is not a real rupture, merely a technical inconvenience. It will teach us that the dead remain available for reuse. It will teach us that a person can be broken down into commercially exploitable fragments and then reassembled whenever a studio wants one more performance. That is dehumanizing enough when done to the living. Done to the dead, it becomes something darker.
We should not do this.
There are living actors — plenty of living actors. If you want a performance, go find a living man to give one. If you want to honor the dead, then honor them as dead. Remember them. Pray for them. Be grateful for the work they already gave the world. But do not digitally ventriloquize them and call it art.
And this applies beyond Hollywood. The same impulse that says we should build AI versions of dead actors is the impulse that refuses to accept mortality at all. It is the same impulse that wants to summon, recreate, simulate, and control what ought to be received with humility. It is the refusal to let the dead remain dead, and the refusal to let the living remain creatures rather than aspiring gods.
So no, I do not think this is harmless. I do not think it is merely clever. And I do not think Christians, or anyone with a sane understanding of human dignity, should shrug and accept it as inevitable.
Don’t talk to your dead father as though he were still here. Pray for him. Don’t ask a machine to conjure the likeness of the dead so that you can pretend mortality has no claim on us. Speak to the living. Love the living. Live among the living.
Leave the dead in peace.

“Kiss Kiss Bang Bang” Photocall at the 58th Cannes Film Festival

Why Bringing Val Kilmer Back With AI Crosses A Moral Line

actors

Death

Film

Hollywood

Michael Knowles

Movies

Bracket season has arrived, and we can state confidently without even looking for evidence that there will be more AI-created entries than ever before.
Gone are the days where the people who don&#8217;t follow college basketball are left to bothering the biggest bro in the office for his picks. Or, better yet, submit an outlandish bracket that miraculously nails the 14 seed that makes it to the Elite 8. Now everyone is just going to turn to their imaginary friends named Claude, and end up submitting the same brackets.
Literally, the same brackets. The Daily Wire had the four leading AI models predict the 2026 NCAA March Madness Basketball Tournament. The first round of projections from all four models was exactly what you’d expect from robots trained on the internet’s safest instincts: Duke, Duke, Duke, and Duke.
The Daily Wire fed the complete 68-team bracket to four of the top AI systems — OpenAI&#8217;s ChatGPT, Anthropic&#8217;s Claude, Google&#8217;s Gemini, and Perplexity — and asked each to produce a full bracket prediction from the First Four through the national championship. Each model received the same seed lines, win-loss records, KenPom efficiency ratings, key injuries, betting odds, and conference placement data.
This is unsurprising, as given a straightforward prompt to process sports predictions, top AI models default to the most obvious answer: The top-ranked team with the best stats. The Blue Devils enter March Madness as the No. 1 overall seed, sat atop the NET, AP Poll, and KenPom, and went 11-2 against AP Top 25 opponents.
There was very little divergence in the projections of all four AI models. ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity all had Duke beating Arizona in the final. The models read the same numbers, weighted the same KenPom rankings, and arrived at the same safe, predictable conclusion: the No. 1 overall seed with the nation’s best defense and best player wins it all.
So we asked AI to think harder&#8230; 

As hard as it might be for AI chatbots to admit, Duke is not a lock to win this tournament. The pre-tournament favorite has won the NCAA men’s tournament only 7 times in the last 19 played tournaments over the past 20 years.
In a second round of analysis, The Daily Wire gave each model the same background information but supplemented the prompt with historical upset base rates dating to the 1985 expansion, specific vulnerability profiles for each No. 1 seed, injury data, and regional geography advantages — factors not fully captured in the first analysis. The models were instructed to abandon tournament-favorite Duke in order to play the role of &#8220;upset analyst&#8221; and to account for the fact that the best team on paper wins the national championship less than 35% of the time.
ChatGPT switched its prediction to Houston, projecting Kingston Flemings as MOP and routing the Cougars through a South Region where they’d essentially play home games at Toyota Center. Gemini also landed on Houston, envisioning a title-game win over Arkansas. Claude pivoted to Michigan, betting on the Wolverines’ No. 1-ranked defense to grind Duke down in the championship game, 71-65.
Perplexity had the boldest prediction, picking 4-seed Arkansas behind freshman point guard Darius Acuff Jr., who it projected to average over 30 points per game through the tournament.
<div id="attachment_1060705" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1060705" class="size-large wp-image-1060705" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Untitled-design-47-1024x559.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="559" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Untitled-design-47-1024x559.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Untitled-design-47-300x164.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Untitled-design-47-768x419.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Untitled-design-47-1536x838.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Untitled-design-47.jpg 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />Illustration via Daily Wire staff.</div>
Without Duke as the default option, all four models agreed that the bracket would devolve into organized chaos.
All four models picked 12-seed Akron to upset 5-seed Texas Tech, citing the Red Raiders’ devastating loss of star J.T. Toppin to a torn ACL and Akron guard Tavari Johnson’s 20-plus points per game. All four picked 9-seed Iowa over 8-seed Clemson, noting that the Hawkeyes are ranked 11 KenPom spots higher despite being the lower seed. And all four picked 11-seed VCU to knock off North Carolina, a team missing projected top-5 NBA pick Caleb Wilson due to a broken thumb.
Here are the results.
ChatGPT 5.4:
<ul>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Final Four: (2) UConn, (6) BYU, (3) Virginia, (2) Houston</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Semis: Houston over UConn, BYU over Virginia</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Championship: Houston over BYU</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Champion: Houston</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">MOP: Kingston Flemings (Houston) — 16.4 PPG, 5.3 AST</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">1-seeds in Final Four: Zero</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Where Duke died: Elite Eight (lost to UConn)</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">First-round upsets by double-digit seeds: 7</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Boldest call: BYU to the Final Four behind AJ Dybantsa (25.3 PPG, nation&#8217;s leading scorer)</li>
</ul>
Claude Opus 4.6:
<ul>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Final Four: (1) Duke, (4) Arkansas, (1) Michigan, (2) Houston</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Semis: Duke over Houston 78-72, Michigan over Arkansas 64-56</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Championship: Michigan 71, Duke 65</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Champion: Michigan</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">MOP: Yaxel Lendeborg (Michigan) — 19 pts, 9 reb in title game</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">1-seeds in Final Four: Two (Duke and Michigan)</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Where Duke died: Championship game (only model to get Duke to the Final Four)</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">First-round upsets by double-digit seeds: 6</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Boldest call: Michigan&#8217;s No. 1-ranked defense grinds Duke into submission in the title game despite Boozer&#8217;s 24 and 11</li>
</ul>
Gemini 3:
<ul>
<li>Final Four: (2) UConn, (4) Arkansas, (2) Iowa State, (2) Houston</li>
<li>Semis: Arkansas over Iowa State, Houston over UConn</li>
<li>Champion: Houston</li>
<li>MOP: Kingston Flemings (Houston)</li>
<li>1-seeds in Final Four: Zero</li>
<li>Where Duke died: Elite Eight (lost to UConn)</li>
<li>First-round upsets by double-digit seeds: 13 (tied with Perplexity for most chaotic bracket)</li>
<li>Boldest call: All four 1-seeds eliminated before the Final Four; McNeese to the Sweet 16; Arizona bounced in the Round of 32 by 9-seed Utah State</li>
</ul>
Perplexity Sonar:
<ul>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Final Four: (3) Michigan State, (4) Arkansas, (2) Iowa State, (2) Houston</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Semis: Houston over Michigan State, Arkansas over Iowa State</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Championship: Arkansas over Houston</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Champion: Arkansas</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">MOP: Darius Acuff Jr. (Arkansas)</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">1-seeds in Final Four: Zero</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Where Duke died: Elite Eight (lost to Michigan State)</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Where Michigan died: Round of 32 (lost to 9-seed Saint Louis — the single wildest pick of the experiment)</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">First-round upsets by double-digit seeds: 13 (by far the most chaotic bracket)</li>
<li class="whitespace-normal break-words pl-2">Boldest call: 1-seed Michigan bounced in the Round of 32 by Saint Louis; 4-seed Arkansas wins it all</li>
</ul>
Duke may still cruise to a championship, but if not, these projections offer alternative brackets to help sort through the chaos of March Madness.

MarchMadnessAI

We Asked 4 AI Models To Do March Madness. They Picked The Same Team — Then We Made Them Think Harder

Basketball

College basketball

March Madness

NCAA Basketball

Sports

An AI-generated version of actor Val Kilmer will appear in the film “As Deep as the Grave” following the death of the celebrity from throat cancer last year.
Film director Coerte Voorhees explained to <a href="https://variety.com/2026/film/news/val-kilmer-ai-film-as-deep-as-the-grave-1236691042/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Variety</a> that his heart was set on Kilmer being in the indie project, but the “Top Gun” star became too ill to come to set, even for one day.
“He was the actor I wanted to play this role,” Voorhees told the outlet. “It was very much designed around him. It drew on his Native American heritage and his ties to and love of the Southwest. I was looking at a call sheet the other day, and we had him ready to shoot. He was just going through a really, really tough time medically, and he couldn’t do it.”
The director said Kilmer’s estate, including his son and daughter, were on board with resurrecting an AI version of their famous dad to star in the project.
“His family kept saying how important they thought the movie was and that Val really wanted to be a part of this,” Voorhees went on. “He really thought it was [an] important story that he wanted his name on. It was that support that gave me the confidence to say, &#8216;Okay let’s do this.&#8217; Despite the fact some people might call it controversial, this is what Val wanted.”
“We really figured out that this is a major missing element,” the director insisted. “Normally we would just recast an actor. I’m all about working with our actors, and we have brilliant performances all throughout this movie. But we can’t roll camera again. We don’t have the budget. We’re not a big studio film. So we had to think of innovative ways to do it. And we realized the technology is there for us.”
The AI version of Kilmer was created using film, photos, and voice recordings from various points in his life. 
“The character in the film also suffers from tuberculosis,” John Voorhees, the film’s producer and Coerte’s brother, explained to Variety. “Again, this historical character mirrored Val’s actual condition when he was suffering from throat cancer. And so when it comes to the voice this is a really unique opportunity for the character to reflect the condition that the actor was actually suffering from, thus creating a kind of a bridge.”
“As Deep as the Grave” was originally titled “Canyon of the Dead,” the outlet noted. It’s based on the true story of archaeologists Ann and Earl Morris as they performed excavations in Arizona to uncover the history of the Navajo people. Kilmer’s likeness will play Father Fintan, a Catholic priest and Native American spiritualist.
Kilmer’s daughter Mercedes said in a statement that her late father “always looked at emerging technologies with optimism as a tool to expand the possibilities of storytelling.” 
“This spirit is something that we are all honoring within this specific film, of which he was an integral part,” Mercedes added.
While still alive, Kilmer worked with Sonantic to create an AI version of his voice, which was used for his role as “Iceman” in “Top Gun: Maverick” (2022).
“As human beings, the ability to communicate is the core of our existence and the side effects from throat cancer have made it difficult for others to understand me,” he said at the time. “The chance to narrate my story, in a voice that feels authentic and familiar, is an incredibly special gift.”

Val Kilmer

A Year Since His Death, An AI Version Of Val Kilmer Will Star In New Film

Celebrities

President Donald Trump accused Iran of waging an aggressive disinformation campaign using artificial intelligence during the ongoing conflict with the United States and Israel, taking direct aim at the American &#8220;corrupt media outlets&#8221; that were parroting the same misinformation.
In a lengthy <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116235861005528220">post on Truth Social on Sunday</a>, Trump said Iran has increasingly relied on AI-generated content and propaganda distributed through sympathetic media outlets and social media accounts.
“Iran has long been known as a master of media manipulation and public relations,” Trump wrote. “They are militarily ineffective and weak, but are really good at feeding the very appreciative fake news media false information.”
Trump specifically pushed back on viral imagery circulating online that purported to show U.S. military losses during the conflict, including claims that multiple American refueling aircraft had been destroyed. The president said those reports, including one attributed to The Wall Street Journal, were false. “The five U.S. refueling planes that were supposedly struck down and badly damaged … are all in service, with the exception of one, which will soon be flying the skies,” Trump said.
The president also rejected widely shared images claiming the U.S. Navy&#8217;s aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln had been struck and set ablaze.
&#8220;Buildings and Ships that are shown to be on fire are not — It’s FAKE NEWS, generated by A.I. For instance, Iran, working in close coordination with the Fake News Media, shows our great USS Abraham Lincoln Aircraft Carrier, one of the largest and most prestigious Ships in the World, burning uncontrollably in the Ocean.&#8221;
Trump went further, suggesting that American media outlets that knowingly amplify false propaganda during wartime should face serious consequences. “The story was knowingly fake and, in a certain way, you can say that those media outlets that generated it should be brought up on charges for treason for the dissemination of false information,” he wrote.
His comments come as <a href="https://abcnews.com/US/wireStory/state-actors-visual-misinformation-iran-war-130849781">analysts warn</a> that AI-generated propaganda has become a major feature of the information war surrounding the conflict. A widely circulated video appearing to show a high-rise building in Bahrain engulfed in flames after an Iranian missile strike was later determined to be AI-generated and shared by accounts linked to the Iranian government, according to researchers tracking online influence campaigns.
Experts said the video contained several visual anomalies typical of AI-generated content, including vehicles appearing fused together and human movements that defied normal physics.
Melanie Smith of the Institute for Strategic Dialogue said state-linked influence operations are increasingly using AI tools to amplify political narratives during wartime.
“The content that’s coming from state actors tends to be a little better targeted,” Smith said. “They have a very clear narrative structure and the videos are used to support some kind of statement they want to make about the conflict.” Researchers say pro-Iran accounts have circulated numerous fabricated clips showing air strikes and military successes in an effort to exaggerate damage inflicted on U.S. and Israeli targets.
Analysts warn that the growing flood of AI-generated content is making it harder for the public to distinguish real battlefield developments from fabricated propaganda. “The volume of AI content is starting to just pollute the information environment in these kinds of crisis settings to a really terrifying degree,” Smith said.
Some social media platforms have begun responding to the surge in misinformation. Nikita Bier, head of product at X, <a href="https://x.com/nikitabier/status/2028873177028555201">announced</a> that users who post AI-generated content related to armed conflicts without disclosure could be suspended from the platform’s revenue-sharing program.
Meanwhile, Emerson Brooking of the Atlantic Council warned that social media has effectively become another battlefield. “If you’re in these spaces, just understand that this is an extension of the physical battle space,” Brooking said. “Your eyeballs and your attention are an asset.”
Trump praised Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, for reviewing broadcast licenses held by outlets he accused of spreading false information. “They get billions of dollars of free American airwaves and use it to perpetuate lies,” Trump wrote, arguing that the Iranian government is attempting to win an information war even as its military suffers setbacks on the battlefield.
“The fact is, Iran is being decimated,” Trump wrote. “And the only battles they ‘win’ are those they create through A.I.”
As the conflict unfolds both on the battlefield and across social media feeds, the struggle over information is just another front to wrestle public opinion into despair and confusion; over what’s real, what’s fabricated, and who controls the narrative.

Iran-Tehran-Explosions-March

Trump Unloads On ‘Corrupt Media Outlets’ That Parrot Iranian Misinformation

Donald Trump

Iran

Military

The internet has united in disgust against a new music video released by AI-generated “actress” Tilly Norwood, which has been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hollywood-actors-union-slams-ai-synthetic-performer-pitched-as-the-next-scarlett-johansson">advertised as</a> “the next Scarlett Johansson or Natalie Portman.”
The song “Take the Lead” is inspired by a recently published <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/ai-actor-tilly-norwood-song-music-take-the-lead-1236526080/">essay</a> written by Eline van der Velden, the creator of Norwood and CEO of production company Particle6 and AI talent studio Xicoia. The exec said it was all done in response to the backlash from Norwood’s debut last year.
The music video, released on Tuesday, begins with a disclaimer saying: “The following production was made by 18 real humans — from production designers to costume designers to prompters, editors, and an actor. No flamingos were harmed in the process.”
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Tilly Norwood | Take The Lead (Official Music Video)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/G7V2Biy3omw?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
“When they talk about me, they don’t see the human spark, the creativity/ I’m just a tool, but I’ve got life,” the lyrics say in part. “They think I’m just a dollar dream but I’ve got more than they believe/ I’m not a puppet, I’m the star.”
“Be the creators we’ve always known/ It’s the next evolution, can&#8217;t you see?/ AI’s not the enemy, it’s the key,” another line says. 
The song also insists that the Norwood character possesses human qualities. 
“They say it’s not real, that it’s fake/ But I am still human, make no mistake/ My soul’s in every move I take/ And you can own the path you make,” the song lyrics read.
These assertions and the over-the-top nature of the music video have led to a slew of mockery.
“It took only 18 humans to achieve this level of soullessness? Imagine what 19 could have done!” one commenter wrote.
“This is the most offensive thing I&#8217;ve seen in a long, long time. And that&#8217;s really saying something,” a second person agreed.
“I strongly feel that this is an insult to life itself,” echoed a third.
“Tilly is, and has always been, a vehicle to test the creative capabilities and boundaries of AI — not take anyone’s job,” van der Velden <a href="https://variety.com/2026/digital/news/tilly-norwood-creator-tells-actors-to-create-ai-avatars-1236638940/">wrote</a> in defense of the created character.
“As an actor myself, I have loved bringing Tilly alive for this video and feel that the ability to now use performance capture in this way, to fully inhabit an AI character, is a phenomenal way to bring an unknown actor like me closer to the craft.” 
She added, “However, at the end of the day, even with brilliant new technology, it’s still important to stress that great AI content isn’t instant — it always takes good ideas, taste, direction, judgment and time. In other words: people remain at the heart of it.”
The Hollywood Reporter <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/ai-actor-tilly-norwood-song-music-take-the-lead-1236526080/">noted</a> that this music video is part of the launch of a “Tilly-verse,” where Norwood and other AI characters can “live, interact, and work.” 
Many prominent stars have come out against the creation of Tilly Norwood, including the media labor union SAG-AFTRA.
“It has no life experience to draw from, no emotion and, from what we’ve seen, audiences aren’t interested in watching computer-generated content untethered from the human experience,&#8221; the organization wrote in a statement last fall. &#8220;It doesn’t solve any ‘problem’ — it creates the problem of using stolen performances to put actors out of work, jeopardizing performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry.”

Tilly Norwood

Music Video For AI-Generated ‘Actress’ Tilly Norwood Gets Absolutely Wrecked

Defense officials were pushing for unrestricted lawful use of Anthropic’s AI models. Anthropic agreed—with two caveats. The leading AI company did not want its technology deployed for autonomous weapons systems or for mass domestic surveillance. The Biden administration previously agreed to these terms under a contract in 2024, but Trump administration Undersecretary of War Emil Michael is pushing back.
“I looked at the contracts and was like, holy cow. You can’t use them to plan a kinetic strike. You can’t use their AI model to move a satellite,” Michael said, arguing that the terms are incompatible with the Pentagon’s mission.
“I need to have terms of service be rational relative to our mission set,” he added.
Negotiations reached a climax when the Department of War designated Anthropic as a &#8220;supply-chain risk.&#8221; Historically, that label has only been used for foreign companies. 
During talks, Anthropic agreed to make exceptions to their rules for certain scenarios, such as planning for a drone swarm or responding to a Chinese hypersonic missile—but those carve-outs were not enough for the Pentagon.
“The exceptions [don&#8217;t] work,” said the undersecretary of War. “I cannot predict for the next twenty years all the things we might use AI for, so all lawful use seems like a good thing. If Congress wants to act, great. We have our own internal policies; we’ll follow them. It’s our province to decide how we fight and win wars.”
Michael also raised concerns about operational risk.
&#8220;If they&#8217;re willing to impose red lines that limit lawful military use, what&#8217;s to stop them from enforcing a shutdown if they disagree with how we&#8217;re applying it?” He added, “If in the middle of an operation they decide it violates something and shut it down, that&#8217;s not just unreliable—it&#8217;s dangerous to the troops depending on it.&#8221;
Senior employees at Anthropic have <a href="https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=cd133ae2d49e3551&amp;rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS1183US1185&amp;sxsrf=ANbL-n6QiThSAILMq57dIAMIniqyHLAwXw:1772902370049&amp;udm=7&amp;fbs=ADc_l-aN0CWEZBOHjofHoaMMDiKpaEWjvZ2Py1XXV8d8KvlI3ppPEReeCOS7s1VbbZz2TLt2sOibMbYx2XAHg-v8xM5VswWDsYo9WtqkvCRRg9-K9YK9-rwJY6otdILLcL1llHf6wa6fD9SWKWQ3hafveoFnDlzP7RXdVXDjm5FT8bTXZrAumtXaqFa-mzfvg6g4QfqAeDxEdIS5054TbMKRJVNt4dwQNA&amp;q=tarun+chhabra&amp;sa=X&amp;sqi=2&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjh0_P_n46TAxXiMlkFHZPEDdEQtKgLegQIFRAB&amp;biw=706&amp;bih=775&amp;dpr=2#fpstate=ive&amp;vld=cid:ee0a1859,vid:09BzmFm6lDU,st:0">publicly acknowledged</a> the company restricts model access when it believes usage violates its policies.
“We know what Russia and China and North Korea and others are trying to do with these models right now. We catch them. We turn it off,” said Tarun Chhabra, a senior member of Anthropic’s national security team, a team involved in negotiations with the Pentagon. Chhabra previously served as a member of Biden’s National Security Council.
Trump administration AI Czar David Sacks has stated that Biden-era policies would cause America to lose the global artificial intelligence race and <a href="https://x.com/DavidSacks/status/2028160240974188590">highlighted</a> that many Biden AI staffers have joined Anthropic. &#8220;Guess where those Biden AI staffers went to work as soon as the admin was over? Anthropic.&#8221;
Biden alum Elizabeth Kelly currently leads Anthropic&#8217;s Beneficial Deployments team and Biden&#8217;s special assistant Benjamin Merkel serves as a legislative analyst.
Anthropic told The Daily Wire that while the company has employed staff from the Biden administration, they recently appointed Trump alum Chris Liddell to the company&#8217;s board of directors.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei added that despite the Trump administration&#8217;s unprecedented decision to deem his company a supply-chain risk, the company will allow the Pentagon to continue using its technology. 
“We have offered continuity. We&#8217;re actually deeply concerned about this. We&#8217;re deeply concerned about the kind of interruption of service, which is exactly what&#8217;s happening when we&#8217;re designated a supply chain risk,” Amodei <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthropic-ceo-dario-amodei-full-transcript/">said</a>.
Secretary of War Pete Hegeseth <a href="https://x.com/SecWar/status/2027507717469049070">confirmed</a> the continued usage, saying, “Anthropic will continue to provide the Department of War its services for a period of no more than six months to allow for a seamless transition to a better and more patriotic service.”
​​Michael explained the unprecedented designation is needed because he didn’t want the risk of Anthropic’s policy bias to enter into any part of the defense enterprise. “If their model has this policy bias based on their constitution, their culture, their people, I don’t want Lockheed Martin using their model to design weapons for me.”
Dean Ball, a former Trump administration official who left his AI advisory position six months ago, said he sympathizes with Anthropic’s stance.
“I’m very sympathetic to—if I built something that was powerful and dangerous and uncertain, and the government was excitedly buying it for uses that could be very profound in how they affect people’s lives—wanting to be very careful that I didn’t sell them something that went horribly [expletive] wrong. And then I am blamed for it by the public and by the government,&#8221; said Ball.
Anthropic’s position differs from other AI companies. Elon Musk’s Grok and Google’s Gemini agreed the Pentagon could use their software for all lawful use cases.
Anthropic CEO Amodei <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthropic-ceo-dario-amodei-full-transcript/">told</a> CBS his hesitation to give the Pentagon full lawful use of Anthropic’s technology is because the &#8220;technology is not ready.&#8221; He added, “We don&#8217;t want to sell something that we don&#8217;t think is reliable, and we don&#8217;t want to sell something that could get our own people killed or that could get innocent people killed.”
Secretary of War Hegseth <a href="https://x.com/SecWar/status/2027507717469049070">argues</a> that unelected tech executives such as Amodei should not make that call and should leave operational risk decisions to the United States military, and ultimately, President Trump.
“The Commander-in-Chief and the American people alone will determine the destiny of our armed forces, not unelected tech executives,&#8221; he stated.

Anthropic AI – Photo Illustration

Are Biden-Era AI Ties Behind Pentagon Showdown In Trump’s War Department?

Biden Administration

Defense

Department of War

Executive

Pentagon

Pete Hegseth

Politics

“Before we go further, we need to acknowledge that our trans community needs abortion care, too.” That’s what Texas Democratic Senate candidate and State Representative James Talarico <a href="https://x.com/Protestia/status/2029225998416245095">claims</a> in a video circulating on X, in which he preaches at a church about the intersection of transgenderism and abortion. To further his argument, Talarico claims that “our neighbors with a uterus” have become “the property of the state” via laws protecting unborn life.
This isn’t the kind of thing that Texas Christians hear in their churches, unless they’re going to one whose orthodoxy is determined by the Democratic Party.
Other bangers from that same <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?mibextid=wwXIfr&amp;v=422454413430414&amp;rdid=dVHm68J8e6TVbN9U">sermon</a> include: “Being Christian and being pro-choice are absolutely consistent, because Christianity is a feminist religion”, and “Did they teach you in Sunday school that Jesus Christ Himself was a radical feminist?”
It’s as if Democratic consultants who have no idea what a Christian believes asked an A.I. to create their perfect candidate. He’s clean-cut, well-mannered, and he’s out there on Sundays bringing the heresy.
Talarico is a leftist atheist&#8217;s idea of a good Christian: a progressive culture warrior in lockstep with the secular world and uninterested in foundational Christian principles like sin, repentance, or salvation.
The idea that it’s possible — and normal — for a person to change sexes, and that such a person deserves the right to murder her child, is theologically beyond the pale. It’s also political insanity in a state like Texas.
But we shouldn’t underestimate the possibility that Talarico’s lies could have some appeal among young people desperately searching for meaning in life.
While Bible-believing Christians will easily see that Talarico’s representation of Christianity is incompatible with Scripture, Americans less familiar with God’s Word are at risk of falling for his heresy hook, line, and sinker. Democrats are counting on this — and the only thing it will cost the people who listen is their souls.
For them, it’s a small price to pay to turn Texas Blue.
Unfortunately, Talarico has had help in spreading his gospel of manipulation to the masses — including via the most famous spiritual seeker in America, Joe Rogan. 
On a July 18, 2025, episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, Talarico claimed that his pro-abortion views are informed by Mary’s choice to bear Jesus. The angel Gabriel, Talarico says, asked Mary “if this was something she wanted to do,” which apparently denotes the importance of consent to pregnancy.
If Mary had said no, presumably Jesus is destined not for the manger but for the same ash heap Talarico would consign so many other children.
Of course, the lawmaker’s presentation of the passage is entirely inaccurate. The angel asks Mary no such thing. Talarico’s attempt to use Mary’s acceptance of Jesus’s conception to justify legally poisoning and dismembering babies before birth isn’t idiotic; it’s intentionally and absurdly evil. Viewing Jesus’s advent in this way perverts the gospel: His miraculous arrival was a rescue mission to save us from our sin, not a politically convenient allegory about bodily autonomy.
In 2021, reacting to Texas’ ban on transing minors he <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1016410325787907">said</a>, “Texas Republicans have passed their anti-trans bill.  Over and over Christians used scripture to justify bullying trans kids. I told them in my faith, God is non-binary.”
God refers to Himself repeatedly in the scriptures as King, Father, and Lord. The Creator of all things made us male and female (Gen. 1:27), making gender fluidity and “transitioning” genders both a scientific and Biblical impossibility.
Getting this wrong means misunderstanding both human nature and God Himself. And Talarico is smart enough to know he is getting it wrong on purpose.
On the political side, the outcomes of such positions are disastrous. Encouraging men, women, boys, and girls to mutilate their bodies and lie about their biology leads to the possibility of lifelong <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6626312/">sterility</a>, <a href="https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(24)00123-4/fulltext">mental instability</a>, and increased rates of <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40250154/">suicide</a>. The insistence that males can become female and vice versa has set itself up as an enemy of free speech, parental rights, and child protection.
Abortion murders an innocent human being, and no one, including women who believe they’re men, should have the right to kill a baby.
In the Texas House, Talarico <a href="https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/177454/james-talarico">voted</a> against every measure to protect unborn babies, gender-deceived children, and parental rights. He is on the record supporting the abolition of prisons. “It’s hard to imagine a world without prisons,” he remarked. “But just because it’s hard doesn’t mean you shouldn’t.”
Talarico is a radical in every sense, an unmitigated prophet of falsehood who seeks to twist the language of faith to serve his evil aims. That’s why the spiritual angle of Talarico’s platform is even more troubling than his politics. Not only does he defend extreme views, but he also weaves them into Christian theology, presenting a progressive form of Christian Nationalism wherein his newfangled interpretation of the Bible informs the law of the land.
See, Democrats don’t have a problem with the Bible, so long as they can just revise it and re-read it to support whatever they currently think about anything. That’s what you get with a candidate who knows just enough about Christianity to try to exploit it.
Unfortunately, Talarico’s pleading pastoral tone could prove persuasive to many — not only to voters, but to spiritual seekers. He claims to hold to Jesus’s words, but rejects all the words that conflict with his worldview. In Talarico’s framing, Jesus is not our Savior from sin and King of the universe; He is reduced to a mascot for left-wing causes, a means by which people can be manipulated into supporting Democrats’ policies.
In &#8220;Screwtape Letters,&#8221; C.S. Lewis warns against using Christianity as a means to the end of social justice. Screwtape, a demon, encourages this misuse of the faith, knowing it leads people away from Jesus, not toward Him:
“We do want, and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything — even to social justice. For the Enemy [God] will not be used as a convenience.”
Talarico’s campaign must be defeated by voters and politicians, yes. But even more importantly, his message must be opposed by pastors and Christians. As toxic as his policies are for our country, the bigger threat is his theology, which is damning to our souls.
* * *
Allie Beth Stuckey is a conservative commentator, host of the podcast “Relatable,” and New York Times bestselling author of “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Toxic-Empathy-Progressives-Christian-Compassion/dp/0593541944/ref=sr_1_1?crid=UANYF7F4G527&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.SR4Z9YTZBiD-LIyJWIe2NqrPQSJrs7v_SeJwqdKhprgz4bRzXt9yi_yz87GrsiKreKNDkh5cktyvWqnwYqCvq-AAWTJyW9idmKxIIFSxmJU.Q-uGoH9skFCMDxfjq4I70mRhShGY4nULiXDRrFrj1Nw&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=Toxic+Empathy%3A+How+Progressives&amp;qid=1749579102&amp;sprefix=toxic+empathy+how+progressives%2Caps%2C55&amp;sr=8-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion</a>“
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Talarico gpt

Democrat Strategists Asked ChatGPT To Create A Christian Candidate. They Got James Talarico.

Bible

Christianity

Democrats

James Talarico

Leftists

Texas

U.S. Politics

Fraudsters are robbing America blind. The federal government <a href="https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105833">estimates</a> fraud costs a family of four roughly $4,000 each year.
Fraud is the inevitable byproduct of a bloated bureaucracy that spends <a href="https://www.bea.gov/data/government/receipts-and-expenditures">$11 trillion annually</a> at the federal, state, and local levels. To conduct an audit, we would need an army of indefatigable accountants. In the past, we couldn’t raise such an army, but now we can. We simply need competent leadership in Congress to deploy it.
This system could have saved <a href="https://apnews.com/article/minnesota-fraud-feeding-our-future-medicaid-9911799c0d0149a64a042abed095be57">billions</a> in Minnesota alone. Instead of sending millions in taxpayer dollars to the <a href="https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/dr-oz-on-medicaid-fraud-fact-finding-mission-in-minnesota-2b-could-be-at-stake/">400 supposed</a> healthcare providers huddled in an industrial building in St. Paul, Minnesota, our government could have sent an FBI team. They would have stopped payments to “<a href="https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/dozens-charged-in-250-million-covid-fraud-scheme-092122">Feeding Our Future</a>,” where fraudsters faked child rosters, randomly assigned ages, and reported meal volumes wildly inconsistent with site capacity — the kind of fraud that is easy for an AI to catch.
The technical solution is to use AI to spot and block fraudulent government payments, such as those to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/minneapolis-quality-learing-center-is-officially-closed-state-records-show">fake daycares</a> in Minnesota. Your bank already does it. If you live in Minneapolis and your card is used in Florida, your bank will deny the transaction and call you within minutes. By contrast, the government’s optional payment screening service has been branded <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/M-25-32-Preventing-Improper-Payments-and-Protecting-Privacy-Through-Do-Not-Pay.pdf">a failure</a>.
Modern AI tools can detect fraud patterns that fool humans, such as multiple nonprofits with the same address, beneficiaries, board members, and employees. These tools automatically flag anomalies like spikes in billing and implausible service delivery. When something is suspicious, these tools can stop the payment for further investigation by a human team.
Congress should require all agencies to run any payment over $10,000 through a fraud detection system and change the law to allow the government to pause suspicious payments. AI can adjudicate most cases quickly. Narrow exceptions should be made for cases where immediate payments are critical to national security. The system can exist within the Treasury, Government Accountability Office, or even report directly to Congress. Regardless of where it lives, we need an elite team of data scientists, engineers, and investigators who oversee our all-important tax dollars competently and ethically.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) and state Attorney General Keith Ellison (D) testify on alleged misuse of federal funds in Minnesota at <a href="https://twitter.com/GOPoversight?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@GOPoversight</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/OversightDems?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@OversightDems</a> – LIVE on C-SPAN3 <a href="https://t.co/LkMJ0ZVExm">https://t.co/LkMJ0ZVExm</a>
— CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/2029197002651701402?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 4, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Source: @cspan/X.com
But tech is not enough. We need the legal tools to stop fraudulent payments immediately. Would you keep paying the bill on a stolen credit card for years? That’s what the government does. When agencies suspect fraud, they often continue paying fraudsters until a court declares the “vendor” to be violating their contract. “Feeding Our Future” received $250 million of taxpayer money for years after the first <a href="https://www.governing.com/management-and-administration/minnesotas-inadequate-oversight-led-to-250m-meal-program-fraud?utm_source=chatgpt.com">allegations</a> of fraud. When Minnesota’s Department of Education slowed the payments on its suspicions, “Feeding Our Future” sued; the judge <a href="https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/judge-rebukes-walz-assertion-that-he-ordered-mde-to-resume-payments-to-feeding-our-future/?utm_source=chatgpt.com">questioned</a> whether the agency had followed the required administrative procedures, and payments to fraudsters resumed. This illustrates a general point — fraudsters know that even credible red flags rarely trigger an immediate stop-pay and criminal prosecution, because agencies lack <a href="https://www.governing.com/management-and-administration/minnesotas-inadequate-oversight-led-to-250m-meal-program-fraud?utm_source=chatgpt.com">investigatory tools</a> and fear losing in court.
Congress, however, lacks technical competence and leadership. While half of all senators are <a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48535">lawyers</a> by training, there is only <a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48535">one senator</a> with an engineering degree. The Senate is not representative of America’s immense economic growth, driven in large part by technologists. It’s time for us to harness that technology to make the government serve us better.
Our prosperity and freedom are at stake. Polarization and growing mistrust in our institutions, coupled with enormous peacetime deficits, are a combustible mix. We can quell it with technology and competent leadership. Stamping out large-scale fraud could cut our deficit by as much as a quarter. Addressing waste as well could eliminate our deficit entirely. Only when families feel the benefits of our prosperity in their own budgets — through lower taxes, cheaper childcare, and healthcare — will the political pressure cool and give us space to confront our most serious challenges as a nation.
Two hundred and fifty years ago, Americans laid the foundation of the most successful democratic government in the world. Our government grew with our prosperity — eventually making full oversight impossible by human effort alone. Today, we have the technology to make our government the most upright and efficient in the world. We need leaders who are capable and willing to use it to protect our taxes, our freedoms, and our future. 

* * *
Mark York is a Harvard-trained computer scientist and Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Minnesota. 

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Menu