For twenty or thirty years, we’ve seen film and television with characters like robots and computers with personalities. These have often been good entertainment.
Sometimes they combined these AI like characteristics with supernatural powers. This requires a certain suspension of disbelief but in the interest of a good story, I have often made that sacrifice.
(Do you believe in talking rabbits, bottles marked “drink me,” or AI’s ability to make sports predictions?)
But do people believe that AI has supernatural powers?
Here we have an article telling who is going to win the next Super Bowls by asking ChatGPT. It is very similar to having your horoscope read, throwing some dice or throwing the bones as in Scandinavian practice or maybe doing some magical writing, you know, putting pen to paper, looking away, writing frantically and seeing if your magical powers manifest.
I strongly suspect someone somewhere is taking this nonsense seriously.
In a Story byList Wire entitled: ChatGPT predicts the next 20 Super Bowl champions in the NFL, does your team win it all?
According to ChatGPT’s A.I., here are the teams predicted to win the next 20 Super Bowls in the NFL. …
And then it has a list.
Once again, let me be clear. This is nonsense. AI is not a predictor of sports outcomes anymore than a magic 8 ball or a Ouija Board.
I think most people know this. I hope so anyway. But sometimes reading the press reports on AI and its developing capabilities that there are those that think that it has or will have god-like capabilities.
The technological singularity—or simply the singularity[1]—is a hypothetical point in time at which technological growth becomes alien to humans, uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unforeseeable consequences for human civilization.[2][3] According to the most popular version of the singularity hypothesis, I. J. Good‘s intelligence explosion model of 1965, an upgradable intelligent agent could eventually enter a positive feedback loop of successive self-improvement cycles; more intelligent generations would appear more and more rapidly, causing a rapid increase in intelligence that culminates in a powerful superintelligence, far surpassing human intelligence.[4]
Now, that sucker might predict some foot ball games — and on the down side, kill all of humanity. But, it would be in a real and strange way, magical – at least in terms of human perception.
I seem to recall, that great legend of science fiction, Arthur C. Clarke, saying that to a more primitive civilization, the advances of technology have the appearance of magic (or words to that effect).
Maybe we are on the road to something like that?
But let me reassure you that based on my training and my experience, currently AI has no predictive powers. That can change but I have seen nothing that leads me to believe anything of that nature has happened or is likely to happen. Not soon.
It is truly depressing to write about this show. I own many classic Doctor Who episodes as well as some of the more modern ones like the Matt Smith era.
(Looking for a new doctor?)
Over the last few years, a program designed to interest young people in science has become a bizarre experiment in bad writing.
Stunts like the first female doctor and then the first black doctor and then Billie Piper as the latest permutation of the doctor are failures to do good writing or naturally and logically continue the series. Before you insult me as disliking women and minorities, I am very much a fan of female characters, the women who played The Master and the Tardis would have made grand Doctors. Idris Elba would have been a wonderful doctor. It is not race or sex, it is the choices.
When you choose a doctor, getting a rise out of the audience and creating controversy is not what you’re supposed to be doing. You are supposed to be casting a strong actor who will convey the essence of the character — and continue the BBC’s stated goal of encouraging young people to engage in science.
Far more significant than opinion I might express are the ratings. You might think I’m mistaken in my dislike.
But do you think the fans are mistaken when the ratings border on tragedy? Does the opinion of those who in huge numbers found other things to do and other shows to watch matter? I think they do.
How few people have to take the time to watch this before the fat lady sings?
And I have to confess after the decisions made by the show runners over the last few years, I can’t help be fear what they are going to do next. I mean just what kind of nutty, illogical nonsense are they going to pull out of their hat given new episodes to play with?
The BBC claims that the show will continue. What is interesting is that they made no commitment to who will run or act in that show and what form it would take. The only guarantee is that we would see the Tardis. Remember the devil is in the details.
Michael Savage writing for the Guardian reports that Doctor Who will continue, BBC reassures fans
It has been attacked for running “woke” storylines and criticised for falling ratings. Its leading actor made a surprise departure at the end of the last series. Yet the BBC has now issued a reassurance to Doctor Who fans worried about the future of the show: “the Tardis is going nowhere”.
Speculation around the show had grown in recent months after Ncuti Gatwa played the eponymous Doctor for only two series before departing in the finale of the programme’s 15th series in May.
Since then, both the BBC and Disney+ – which has co-funded the last two series – have been tight-lipped over the show’s future. However, speaking at the Edinburgh TV festival, the BBC’s content chief, Kate Phillips, told anxious fans it had a future, whether or not Disney+ stayed onboard.
What is the business ethics here? Well, let’s say a hypothetical program that was once a ratings blockbuster was re-designed to attract a very small niche audience depriving its regular fans of their entertainment and their wishes. Hypothetically. Would that be wrong? I think there might be circumstances under which that could be justified. If political points of view are important enough to overtake a show’s original purpose, I believe that is a legitimate choice.
As for those who like the original program, they have other viewing choices.
But if the ratings show failure, should the show change course or end? I think those are also legitimate choices.
I personally believe that show should go on hiatus while they develop a new creative team and select new actors starting from scratch.
That is what I think. Here is more about the ratings.
DOCTOR WHO Ratings Plummet Amid Reports That The BBC Has Axed Ncuti Gatwa As The Time LordBy JoshWilding
A big-money deal with Disney+ was meant to bring Doctor Who to a global audience, with Russell T Davies considered a safe pair of hands to put the franchise in after he successfully relaunched the show in the mid-2000s with actors like Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant, and Billie Piper.
However, his “woke” storylines have drawn widespread criticisms, with even longtime fans feeling that the show has become too heavy-handed and preachy with its messaging. Ncuti Gatwa, meanwhile, has supposedly been axed from the series (the BBC responded to those claims by calling it “pure fiction”).
This newest report has analysed the seven-day viewing figures for the first half of Gatwa’s second year in the TARDIS, and they don’t make for pretty reading.
To summarize, the ratings are worse than dismal. The fans are voting with their watching habits and they are not watching Doctor Who.
That is a legitimate concern for all of us.
If you love the core ideas that made doctor who a classic, then let us advocate for a strong show that continues the tradition.
Elon Musk just canceled a spacecraft launch, settled a lawsuit over paying ex-twitter employees for what must have been at minimum hundreds of millions of dollars and federal judges in California and Maryland certified separate class action lawsuits against the carmaker and its CEO personally.
(An illustration from Dante descent into the nine planes of hell. It seems appropriate. JP)
But there is more, much more.
One of the reasons people buy particular models of car is the resale value. The idea that you might get back a high proportion of your purchase prize is a compelling one.
The resale price of a Tesla is collapsing, at least, according to Mike Taylor, writing for the Cool Down. He suggests the collapse might be do to the many controversies, some of them political, surrounding the controversial figure.
Mike Taylor writing for The Cool Down in article entitled: New report reveals stunning trend in used Tesla vehicle prices: ‘Quite exceptional’ reports that the value of used Teslas is collapsing.
The cost of a used Cybertruck has dropped the most over the last year: 30.4% to $83,963. The Model S is down 22.6% to $26,534, the Model X is down 16.8% to $37,747, and the Model Y is down 12% to $29,216. The most affordable offering is the Model 3, which is down 8% to $23,318.
“The fact that its average used car sale price would dip below the industry average, which includes inexpensive mass-market vehicles, is quite exceptional,” Electrek reported, noting used Tesla prices are down 4.6% year over year, while the market is up 1.2%.
Why is this important?
“It’s proof that the Tesla brand has taken a massive reputational hit and there’s no clear recovery in sight,” Electrek stated. (My emphasis. jp)
The other day I was reading an article in which Elon Musk claimed that if you want to be amazingly rich, all you have to do is work 120 hour weeks. I immediately discarded the nonsense classifying it as one of those ridiculous screeds where wealthy people attempt to appear virtuous against all actual evidence. (I will not link to it – if that kind of braggadocio is your cup of tea, you can look it up.)
However, we do have an insight into how he makes money from an investigation by CNN and discussed in an article from The Cool Down.
Cody Januszko writing for The Cool Down has an article entitled: Small businesses forced into bankruptcy after multimillion-dollar deal with Tesla: ‘It’s been horrible’
CNN’s recent investigation sheds new light on Tesla’s business practices. Many of the small businesses that Tesla contracted were not paid for their labor or products, forcing at least two of them into bankruptcy.
“It’s been horrible. If I didn’t have my family, I don’t think I would have made it,” Jennifer Meissner, one of the business owners who went bankrupt, said.
Unpaid contractors have filed liens against Musk’s companies. Liens are legal claims against property that allow a creditor to take the property if the debt isn’t paid.
CNN’s financial analysis shows that more than $110 million in liens have been filed against Tesla over the past five years, with a potential $24 million still owed.
It would appear to me that if you don’t pay your bills, you can accumulate a lot of money. These small businesses, at least the ones still surviving, are making legal claims against Tesla, so something about payments that is very bad is happening. Let us see what develops.
In international news surrounding the fellow, Elon Musk, we have this burst of disaster journalism. Musk’s AI, Grok, has been superseded in China by the local’s AI system. What do you think? Several hundred million in losses? That is just a guess. I would think providing an AI system for cars produced in China would be in the tens of billions of dollars but I might be mistaken.
Joe Wilkins writing for Futurism has an article entitled: Elon Musk Just Suffered a Humiliating Defeat in China
And now, more than a month after Musk promised to roll Grok out to Teslas “next week,” it turns out a Chinese AI model will be taking the chatbot’s place.
According to Bloomberg, Tesla’s Chinese division is planning to introduce in-car voice assistance via DeepSeek and Bytedance’s AI models at some point in the near future.
It would seem that the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune are falling with intensity upon Musk and his empire. Of course, there are many critics who might find the barrage just and fair. Well, there are a lot of points of view out there.
What are the business ethics issues here? Corporate citizenship would be a good call. Tesla does not seem interested in paying taxes or benefiting the nation to whom it owes so much.
Of course, we could do Stakeholder analysis. The government, it could be argued always seems to come up on the short end of the stick on these deals with Elon Musk, — cars, spacecraft and DOGE all seem a bit problematic. What about the American People? Elon Musk seems to me more of a well paid parasite than any kind of benefit. But we could do the full shareholder analysis. How would we classify Elon Musk with his enormous wealth and powerful connections purchased for many millions of dollars? Would we call him a Super Stakeholder? His needs seem at times to outweigh citizens, nations and economic systems. All these appear as little more than pawns to our class of oligarchs.
Sometimes, it seems like we are reading a new and cruel version of the Iliad and the Odyssey where the gods of Greek mythology walk the earth and interfere with the destinies of men. These billionaires seem every bit as capricious as Hera and Zeus, and their depredations are equally cruel.
We cannot escape reading about these people, however godlike they think they are. The news will continue to roll in.
Let us see what happens to him and his empire next week. I’m sure it will be interesting.
After I went through three News Networks I came up with twenty eight business ethics topics that merited my comment and analysis.
There are all current, happening now. There are not subjects on long term business ethics tragedies like global warming or the collapse of the moral order in the current administration or the cowardice of our major institutions and our ruling class.
For the love of a Merciful God, what has happened to this nation and the larger world?
When I started writing this blog almost twenty years ago, I could depend on two or three topics a day. This wasn’t a gradual collapse of national morality. It is tied directly to the 2016 election of Donald Trump and his unfortunate re-appearance in 2024. There was a massive acceleration in business ethics problems and it continues to accelerate.
Twenty-eight sounds like a lot of topic but you must understand I haven’t completed my usual gazette of news sources. I still have the financial news and the foreign press as well as some specialty publications on tech and science.
I can easily be looking at sixty to seventy-five topics after my usual examination of the news.
One of the parables in the New Testament is about the absence of the necessary workers to harvest the crops, a thinly veiled reference to spreading the word of God. It concludes with the exhortation to pray that the Lord sends more help.
“The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest.”
Well, we need a hundred business ethics writers to cover this amount of material.
If the United States and its democracy end as so much evidence indicate is happening, it will not matter if there are any writers or any concern over business ethics.
We will just have a gangster government. Money and influence will eclipse any moral values. Those at the Heritage Foundation and the writers of Project 2025 will have attained their goals in creating a nation when a tiny minority of depraved self-interested ideologues make decisions for the rest of us.
If democracy survives, those of us who believe in the promise of the United States, the importance of actual Christ based Christianity and morality, will be more important than ever.
There will be much to repair, much to recover and many, many to be brought to the bar of justice and punished for their crimes.
Down in the article referenced below, Ms. West-Knights, said that as thoroughly as Prince Andrew’s scandals have been covered, a new book is like taking “a thousand daggers to a corpse.” It is a very eloquent and appropriate line.
But then she goes into some of what the books says. I have been following the sorry story of Prince Andrew, a man given every advantage who then tossed them all away for trysts with women and a desperate need for money he hasn’t in anyway earned. He could have been a symbol of nobility and kindness but that would have required him to think about someone beside himself and he is unable to do that.
What does the book say? In spite of my interest in the subject and the many articles I’ve read there was much to see. This book has many new revelations about this fellow’s pitiful behavior.
I can’t say enough about the Imogen West-Knights’ writing. It is delicious, biting and loaded with so many things I want to quote that choosing any particular paragraph or line is hard.
Imogen West-Knights writing for Slate discusses the new book called “Entitled.” The article she wrote is linked to below and called It’s Hard to Imagine a Book More Damning About the British Royal Family Than This.
Usually find a good quote from an article is very straightforward. I chose the most damning paragraph but this is article is well worth reading and you should read it in full. There is deadly acid in almost every line.
… Lownie (the book’s author) reportedly approached about 3,000 people for this book, of whom he says only a tenth replied, but that is enough. And what these people—drawn from Andrew’s love life, his professional life, his staff, and his sometime friends—have to say about him is damning beyond belief. Here follows just some of the claims Lownie makes about Andrew, all of which are backed up by testimony from people who know or knew the prince, but still just allegations, I suppose: He had a member of the royal staff moved from his job for wearing a nylon tie, and another because he had a mole on his face. He had 40 women brought to his hotel room in Thailand over a five-day visit. Aged 26, he had dozens of stuffed animals on his bed, one of which wore a vest that read “It’s tough being a prince.” He missed his daughter’s 12th birthday party to hang out with Epstein at his Miami beach house. He ran up a bill of £325,000 on helicopters and planes in 2005 alone. He let a Libyan gun smuggler pay for a holiday he took to Tunisia and accepted a present of a bugged MacBook Pro from an attractive woman who turned out to be a Russian spy; he later tried to get himself a free Fabergé egg on an official Kremlin tour. In his role as a special representative for the United Kingdom, he earned, in the diplomatic community, the nickname “His Buffoon Highness” by refusing to follow his briefs and perhaps even read them in the first place. Once, driving his £80,000 Range Rover to Royal Lodge in Great Windsor Park, he found that the gates’ sensor was broken, so, rather than taking a 1-mile detour, he rammed them open, causing thousands of pounds’ worth of damage.
Based on this single paragraph and the rest is equally damning, the book’s title, “Entitled,” seems at best a cruel understatement.
It has been written that those to whom much has been given, much is to be expected. Seldom has so many benefits and honors been given one man with so little return.
Environmental destruction is a world wide problem. Some nations are taking the problem seriously. I don’t live in one of those. I live in the United States where environmental rules and regulations are on the chopping block, victims of dark money, ruthless corporate officials and the right wing media machine.
But other nations have not given up the struggle and one of them is Sri Lanka.
I want you to know that fines as in this case are a good way of punishing miscreants who do severe harm. Money is useful in repairing environment damage and making victims whole.
But a message that resonates requires imprisonment and other directly personal penalties. It is one thing to require a corporation to pay a billion dollars but another to make the CEO pay money out of his own pocket, suffer travel restrictions and and an inability to do financial transactions or serve on corporate boards. Those kinds of penalties will get corporate officials’ attention. Corporations have a lot of money. What they don’t have are officials willing to suffer.
We can also destroy corporations who sin against the nation’s collective interest. The corporate death penalty where the corporation’s legal existence is ended and its assets sold as a penalty would also serve to get the attention of the wrong doers.
Corporations are creations of the state. Their charters can be revoked and they can be ended. It is a choice we should have. Corporate incompetence and villainy have resulted in tens of thousands of deaths, billions upon billions of dollars in damages and massive destruction eco-systems. If we “killl” a few, they might do less harm. We might at least get the idea across that we take their destruction of the planet seriously.
We have a responsibility as patriots to protect our nation. That includes the land, the water and the air. It is a profoundly moral duty. For those of us who believe in Christianity, we also have a responsibility to act as stewards of God’s creation. That also calls us to action.
Let us go forth armed with righteousness and a willingness to confront and defeat evil.
James Pilant
(Probably the proper attitude for hauling a dangerous cargo and chemicals and microplastics.)
In an article written for The Cool Down, Alexis McDonell, writes in an article entitled:
Shipping giant hit with $1 billion fine after causing one of worst marine disasters in history: ‘Unprecedented devastation’
The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka found a shipping company liable for a billion.
In June 2021, the MV X-Press Pearl caught fire and sank off the coast of Colombo while carrying a cargo of chemicals.
The Supreme Court described the result as “unprecedented devastation to the marine environment of Sri Lanka,” citing the deaths of 417 turtles, 48 dolphins, eight whales, and countless fish that washed ashore. Debris from the ship, including several tons of plastic pellets used to manufacture bags, spread across beaches and into the ocean.
“This marine environmental disaster … resulted in the widespread release of toxic and hazardous substances into the marine environment, poisoning ocean waters, killing marine species, and destructing phytoplankton,” the judgment stated.
There is a big sell off in AI related stocks at the moment. But don’t worry. After reading several dozen articles in the business press once again asserting that AI is the future of, well, everything and more, the investors will be back.
So, far AI has produced a vast wasteland of crappy video’s on You Tube and countless poorly written novels, essays, short stories, editorials, love notes and much else. This doesn’t give you a lot of faith in the thing.
It has enabled talentless and vapid people everywhere the ability to write at a modicum level which is scary. But that isn’t the real scary part. The part that worries me is the sheer volume. A ten year old with an AI writing program can write tens of thousands of articles, the same is true in regard to fake images and much else.
And it is happening now. AI is producing countless short films, an infinity of pictures and articles without count. These all consuming devices are devouring the internet and all of social media as I write this (without I might add a shred of AI – I don’t use it – I won’t use it.).
It is my business, Business Ethics, that keeps me reading article after article about the coming “revolution.” Some of it sounds scaremongering. I hope that it is just hype but after watching the flood of material the thing is already producing, it is hard not to have some worries.
Even if AI operates at the level of a functional moron, businesses in the hope of replacing their human workers and making enormous profits are plugging it into all kinds of uses. It is the magic wand that will fix business problems and propel us into a sort of corporate nirvana, at least, according to the hype. I have serious doubts.
When it is late at night and I want something intelligent to listen to while I am drifting off to sleep and search the internet and find wall to wall AI content which is usually just exaggerations, lies and fantasies with a tiny amount of actual data, when I do that, I worry about our future and those that think our future is going to be based on this stuff.
(Trying to understand AI and failing.)
From Fortune Magazine below is a link to an article called – An MIT report that 95% of AI pilots fail spooked investors. But it’s the reason why those pilots failed that should make the C-suite anxious
Ok, now let’s look at what the report actually says. It interviewed 150 executives, surveyed 350 employees, and looked at 300 individual AI projects. It found that 95% of AI pilot projects failed to deliver any discernible financial savings or uplift in profits. These findings are not actually all that different from what a lot of previous surveys have found—and those surveys had no negative impact on the stock market. Consulting firm Capgemini found in 2023 that 88% of AI pilots failed to reach production. (S&P Global found earlier this year that 42% of generative AI pilots were abandoned—which is still not great).
…
But where it gets interesting is what the NANDA study said about the apparent reasons for these failures. The biggest problem, the report found, was not that the AI models weren’t capable enough (although execs tended to think that was the problem.) Instead, the researchers discovered a “learning gap”—people and organizations simply did not understand how to use the AI tools properly or how to design workflows that could capture the benefits of AI while minimizing downside risks. (My emphasis.)
A LEARNING GAP! These people are spending millions of dollars and incorporating AI technology into everything humanly and inhumanly imaginable and they don’t “understand how to use AI tools properly.” I don’t even want to discuss “workflows.” I am depressed enough.
Here, let’s discuss the sell off we are at the moment observing.
From Futurism an article entitled – Meta Freezes AI Hiring as Fear Spreads, linked to below.
The AI industry as a whole is facing a critical juncture, with mounting concerns contributing to a massive tech selloff roiling the stock market this week. Shares of AI tech stalwarts, including Nvidia and Palantir, have plummeted — raising concerns that the hype had driven their valuations too high for the shaky realities of their current tech.
What is the above paragraph saying? Well, unlike virtually any element or aspect of AI, the paragraph above is straightforward. It is very simple. Nobody know what this stuff is worth. You can say things like the future of all technology and all of American business will rely on Artificial Intelligence and you can say it over and over again but what does it mean in dollars and cents? If all American businesses will become dependent on AI, how much will it cost to implement, to operate on a regular basis and are there going to be any profits? Not to mention its effect on investment and return itself. Will it replace buying and selling by humans and if so will business, industry and investment all become one united AI operation like one of those science fiction movies,(The Forbin Project)?
And then there are the little side issues, like a massive unemployment across multiple fields that will leave the economy as empty and useless as an old paper sack or the other little issue of destroying all life on earth should there bit a little misstep in the application of the thing in one small industry or maybe even one small laboratory.
Now if none of this concerns you and you find me alarmist, try reading this little tid bit below!
Joe Wilkins writing for Futurism has an article: OpenAI Chairman Says AI Is Destroying His Sense of Who He Is.
Speaking on the podcast “Acquired” earlier this week, the chair of OpenAI’s board, Bret Taylor, expressed his anxiety that AI chatbots like ChatGPT are redefining his relationship to technology, destroying — or at least making unrecognizable — the world of programming in which he built his career.
So, you think I’m alarmist. I think Bret Taylor is more scared than I am and since he has more knowledge, I find that worrying.
(I seem to recall the minister from “Plan 9 from Outer Space” saying that we should all be concerned about the future because that is we will be spending our time.)
To sum up. This AI stuff is dangerous, has already had deleterious effects and nobody anywhere seems to really understand what it can do or what is going to happen.
The neighbors can be a problem and especially now as customs about lawns are in the middle of change. We are entering a new era where the classic manicured lawn is under attack and people are moving toward natural lawns that provide food for insects and animals. Of course, the traditional bad neighbor behaviors over trees and property lines have never gone away.
(I was struck by the fact that this engraving from the middle of the 19th Century very much appears to ba a modern natural lawn. Trees and wildflowers abound and the grass is largely uncut. Of course, power mowers are at least fifty years away. But it is a compelling vision of man living in considerable harmony with nature. jp)
The article below used the phrase “borderline theft.” No, taking your lawn furniture without permission is theft (or grand larceny if the value is high enough). I think they are calling it borderline so it doesn’t sound so awful but it is. You cannot go into people’s yards and take stuff.
I fully agreed with commentators who were outraged.
In an article from People Magazine entitled: Woman Is ‘Livid’ After Returning from Weekend Away to Find Her Garden Furniture in Her Neighbor’s Yard: ‘Borderline Theft’.
A woman is “livid” after her neighbor borrowed her lawn furniture without asking
The woman, who shared her story on a community forum, said the neighbor “just helped herself” without so much as a note
Commenters on the woman’s post unanimously agreed that she had every right to be bothered by the neighbor’s “shocking” behavior
In this article linked to below, we have a story of a homeowner apparently on a tree slaughtering binge both on his property and the neighbors in an area where trees have legal protection. I really get the impression that there is just something wrong with him. Attacking an ancient tree with a chainsaw at one in the morning is not the act of a disciplined mind.
You’ll need to read the article linked to below for the details. I found the article’s conclusion quoted below to be more useful for those with homes and lawns.
The Cool Down published an article entitled Homeowner stunned by new neighbor’s bizarre acts on front lawn: ‘Went out at like one in the morning with a … chainsaw’ written by Sara Traynor.
Standard, bare lawns, like the kind the OP’s neighbor preferred, are actually not so great for the environment. Having only one species of plant in your yard can hurt the area’s biodiversity. Plus, they usually require a lot more upkeep, since these grasses aren’t accustomed to the local environment.
The OP’s first neighbor had the right idea. Having a variety of plants in your yard is great for local wildlife. Replacing your traditional lawn with native plants or a natural lawn is cheaper in the long run and gives pollinators a much-needed food source.
“Sounds like a great neighborhood to live in!” one commenter said. “And nice to hear the tree company snitched on him.”
It is not a huge leap of logic that neighbors should not be dispatching tree choppers or any other landscape style worker onto your property without permission but in the story below they did. I have many stories along these lines where trees, hedges, flowers and natural lawns were annihilated by the next door neighbor or the Home Owners Association. An HOA sounds more and more like a place where the borderline mentally ill go to have powertrips and create havoc. There should be state and federal law limiting their operations.
The Cool Down published an article entitled – Homeowner stunned after waking up to find workers hacking away in backyard: ‘I repeatedly told them to get off of my property’ Katie Lowe
Environmentally conscious homeowners across the country are increasingly finding themselves at odds with homeowners associations over their right to grow gardens on their own property. Cases are constantly emerging where HOAs restrict or even attempt to remove native trees, vegetable gardens, and natural lawns — even on properties not technically under HOA governance.
One Georgia homeowner recently woke to find workers in their backyard, hired by a neighbor and allegedly supported by the HOA, attempting to cut down a healthy sweet gum tree. The tree, which straddled a property line, had never been the subject of a complaint. Yet, without notice or consent, the crew pruned it severely, leaving it damaged and potentially dangerous.
I was reading through my three articles above and realized that I had provided few remedies to these kinds of acts. So I located an article on what to do if someone kills or damages a tree. From my reading, this the most common dispute.
James Pilant
When a Neighbor Damages or Destroys Your Tree by Ilona Bray, J.D.
If your neighbor or someone else cuts down, removes, or hurts a tree on your property without your permission, that person is required to compensate you (the tree owner) for your loss. If necessary, you can sue to enforce your rights.
Here’s the lowdown on what you must prove to recover for a damaged or destroyed tree, and how much money you can recover.
I had to read the article below twice because I found it hard to believe that some one would replace real life vegetation like grass with a sort of artificial carpet.
What makes this even more bizarre is the fact that I have been writing and advocating for natural lawns of wildflowers and other alternatives to the carefully mowed lawns which cost so much in fuel and environment degradation. I had come to believe that there was a generally broad movement to a genuine appreciation of nature and then I see this man acquire an artificial lawn.
(It turns out I am little short of pictures of grass. So, this lion is sitting on “grass” and has expressed his lack of satisfaction in the Astro-Turfing as you can see. jp)
The article is highly critical of the practice and it doesn’t appear to save money or retain its “attractiveness” over time.
The article linked to below is entitled Homeowner sparks backlash after showing off newly landscaped yard: ‘Why would someone voluntarily live this way?’ and is written by Sarah Winfrey. It is from The Cool Down.
According to Clean Water Action, artificial turf poses health risks due to the plastics and other potentially damaging chemicals it contains.
Artificial turf and other plastic-based gardening solutions leach chemicals and toxins into the earth, which is harmful to human health and can contaminate soil for decades to come.
Per Real Homes, fake turf can be a deceptively high-maintenance approach to lawn care and landscaping, requiring significant maintenance to keep it presentable. On top of that, it can burn in the sun, and constant exposure to the elements degrades it over time.
Let me be upfront here. I live in an apartment and the only thing around this building is cement. But I live in a community with many homes and lawns. I live near parks and nature tracks and there is good sized federal park north of here.
I do appreciate nature and I want you, my kind readers, to make good choices so let me even thought I don’t have a lawn recommend a good lawn choice for you.
A few days ago, there was an attack on the CDC by a gunman. Our current regime hardly bothered to take note but the CDC is home to scientists and highly professional experts in their fields. These are the dregs of humanity in the eyes of our oligarch managed masses of barely literate malcontents currently occupying the highest offices in Washington. And so, the shooting did not trouble our government.
But those who have spent their lives working to protect and improve the lives of all Americans resent being shot at by crazy people and disparaged by their current “leadership.” That is not surprising. What is also not surprising is that they are publicizing their discontent.
They have published a signed letter demanding change and one of the changes is for Kennedy to stop spreading misinformation.
That first paragraph quoted from the letter found below is a mountain of eloquence and it may find its way into the future history books once we escape the clutches of the current regime.
(A picture from The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes showing Sherlock and a criminal.)
Below is a report from Time magazine entitled Hundreds of Public Health Workers Call on RFK Jr. to ‘Stop Spreading Inaccurate Health Information’ After CDC Shooting written by Chantelle Lee.
“The attack came amid growing mistrust in public institutions, driven by politicized rhetoric that has turned public health professionals from trusted experts into targets of villainization—and now, violence,” public health workers said in the letter, which was also addressed to members of Congress. “CDC is a public health leader in America’s defense against health threats at home and abroad. When a federal health agency is under attack, America’s health is under attack. When the federal workforce is not safe, America is not safe.”
The public health workers went on to accuse Kennedy, a prominent vaccine skeptic, of being “complicit in dismantling America’s public health infrastructure and endangering the nation’s health by repeatedly spreading inaccurate health information.” They cited several statements and actions that Kennedy has made in recent months, pointing to his claim that mRNA vaccines “fail to protect effectively” against upper respiratory infections such as COVID-19—despite years of research showing that the shots are both safe and effective—and his announcement that HHS would be winding down mRNA vaccine development. They also condemned his decision to remove all the experts from a critical vaccine advisory committee. And they said some of Kennedy’s past comments—such as claiming that there is a “cesspool of corruption at CDC”—were “sowing public mistrust” in the health agency.
Will Kennedy stop spreading lies and misinformation? Don’t be ridiculous! In this administration, lies and misinformation constitute the very core of their being. They are living evidence of an accumulation of half assed beliefs, ill formulated concepts and huge masses of things they would like to be true but aren’t. He isn’t going to change. He owes his office to craven subservience to the “great” leader.
What are the ethics here?
These aren’t hard calls. The health care workers who have labored long and with amazing success to protect all Americans are heroes.
Right now they are being lambasted for doing their jobs. Many, a great many, are right now being fired in the name of “efficiency.” This government’s idea of efficiency is the destruction of a government that works and not just that but an embrace of a radical anti-science, anti-rational, belief system more befitting a basement dwelling conspiracy theorist than a working 21st Century government. It is all such a damned shame.
What is happening is wrong to the very center of the bone. There is not rational defense for what the government is doing.
When will this end? When will good, competent people return to rule?
Well, we will see if we can ride these horrors out.
Pilant's Business Ethics Blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.