This is a video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World.
This video is a CreepyPasta story I wrote and narrated myself about a secret mission by NASA during the Voyager program. Enjoy!
Why You Should Be Skeptical (And Suspicious) Of Those Who Talk About Falling Birthrates
In general, I try not to discuss politics outside of appropriate spaces. And those spaces are usually small, confined, and located within areas where nobody close enough to punch one another. That’s not just a byproduct of having followed the news too closely for the past 10 years. I’ve just learned over the years that talking politics with random people is a quick way to make enemies, get angry, and generally lose what little faith in humanity you might have had.
There’s a time and a place to have political discussions. That time is almost never and that place is almost nowhere, unless you actively work in institutions that deal in such policies. You just have to be aware that certain discussions about certain issues are bound to get heated. And it’s next to impossible to change anyone’s mind about a particular position through these discussions.
However, in my personal experience, which I understand is limited, I’ve noticed there are a few hot-button topics that often double as red flags for certain people. It’s not that the topics themselves aren’t relevant. They usually are. But when certain people single them out as a major area of concern, it warrants a certain level of caution. Because many of those people may not be arguing in good faith.
There are many issues and topics like that. But one in particular, which has become relevant in multiple countries, has to do with falling birthrates. Now, in terms of the actual numbers, there is cause for concern. If you actually look up population trends in numerous countries, you’ll confirm that this is a global trend. And falling birthrates certainly do incur a host of social, political, and economic problems for any given society.
That being said, there’s a right way to approach this issue, as well a wrong/misguided/deeply disturbing way. The right way is more academic than political. You study the factors surrounding the trend. Analyze which of those factors are influenced by certain policies. Then, you take the appropriate prescriptive measures.
But that’s not the approach certain people make. I don’t want to name names, but most of these people are closely aligned with the conservative, right-wing, or reactionary part of the political spectrum. They also tend to be staunch traditionalists who argue society has deviated too much from the morals, values, and social norms we used to have. And addressing the problem of falling birthrates, along with a host of other problems, requires that society reverse that trend.
Now, the people making these points may very well be sincere. They may genuinely believe that people would be happier and more prosperous if they lived like we did in whatever nostalgic past era they idolize, whenever and wherever it might be.
However, in terms of the actual substance of this argument, it’s total bullshit.
And in terms of larger implications, it might even be a mask for a more nefarious agenda.
To understand why, it’s worth asking two important questions with respect to birthrates and those who obsess over it.
Question #1: Who benefits most directly from increasing birthrates?
Question #2: What other agenda does addressing this issue serve?
In the case of falling birthrates and ways to address it, there are certain policy prescriptions that tend to get emphasized over others. Those who like to frame declining birthrates as a serious issue tend not to talk much about the rising costs of childcare, housing, and food. They also tend not to talk much about the fact that wages, on a global scale, have remained relatively stagnant.
Instead, the reactionary crowd will highlight social issues like LGBTQ rights, declining marriage rates, feminism, and a lack of religious affiliation. Even if they touch on some of the economic issues, they won’t label them as a high priority. They’ll just frame women, teenagers, and sexual minorities as deviants or aberrations who are not contributing to society in a meaningful way.
They may claim they’re just concerned about the future of society. But in general, their concerns can often be boiled down to furthering draconian policies on women, workers, and young people. And the people and organizations who benefit are usually who you might expect.
Rich, well-connected business owners need a growing population to buy their products and/or get locked into their network of services.
Powerful, well-connected political organizations need a growing population to sustain the social and economic status quo that put them into power.
Religious organizations need a steady increase in population to ensure more adherents, which in turn means more influence and tax-free money for them.
The ones who don’t benefit are usually women who can’t access or afford family planning. It also negatively impacts LGBTQ+ communities because they’re denigrated for not contributing to the population/consumer/worker base. It also negatively effects workers who get stuck in cycles of poverty because they have too many kids that they cannot afford.
Again, this is not to say that falling birthrates aren’t an issue. There are certainly steps society can take to address this issue. And those steps will definitely vary from country to country. But for certain people of certain political leanings, it’s a cover for regressive, reactionary policies that benefit nobody except those who are already rich and powerful.
Be aware of that because, in most cases, serving the interests of those at the top of an imperfect system only hinders any efforts to address those imperfections.
Filed under abortion, political correctness, politics, sex in society
Japan Is Launching An AI Dating App (And Why It’s A Good Idea)
Back in 2017, I posed a question that I didn’t think would be answered for decades. I asked whether anyone would allow an artificial intelligence program to pick their spouse. Now, this was several years before ChatGPT came out. Like most everyone else, I had no idea that artificial intelligence was going to become mainstream in less than a decade.
There’s no question that a lot has happened in that span, so much so that it’s now a half-a-trillion dollar industry. This is no longer some futuristic sci-fi technology that most people alive today won’t see. AI is already here. If you have an internet connection, you can use it right now. Even if our best AI systems aren’t at human-level intelligence, that doesn’t mean they aren’t useful. Entire industries have emerged in recent years that either utilize or rely on AI.
But when it comes to our love life, I think the application of AI is inevitable. When I first asked the question, I made the point that AI has the benefit of analyzing data about people in a way that’s more objective and less prone to emotional manipulation. And in theory, more advanced AI systems can also account for someone’s emotional health when determining who is their ideal romantic partner.
I expected someone to come along and use AI for this purpose sooner or later. Well, it ended up being much sooner than expected.
Because the Tokyo government in Japan is officially launching a dating app that will utilize AI to help people find romantic partners. Now, make no mistake. This is not some overhyped tech startup or some online gimmick. This effort is a non-profit public initiative. Signing up is free, but users have to register, provide government identification, verify their income, and establish clearly that they are indeed single.
These steps aren’t just necessary for the sake of providing adequate data for the AI. This makes clear that the goal of this app isn’t to facilitate random hookups or provide a platform for porn stars to advertise their OnlyFans page. The goal is to actually help people get together, get married, and start families.
And for Japan, and many other industrialized countries, that’s an increasingly urgent issue. Marriage rates have been declining in Japan for years, along with birthrates. This has led to a serious demographic problem in which the population of Japan is declining and young people have shown little interest in dating.
The reasons for this trend are many. Between Japan’s insanely demanding work culture and gender politics, dating in the classical sense has become unfeasible. The effort it takes to find someone and date them just isn’t feasible for many young Japanese. But this is where AI can help.
So long as the AI has adequate data, it can factor in all of someone’s quirks, habits, personalities, and desires when matching them with someone else. While it’s doubtful any AI for any dating app has that kind of data at the moment, the incentives for Japan are actually what makes this a good idea. And if it has any measure of success, it would definitely be worth pursuing for other countries.
I’m comfortable saying this because I’ve used dating apps before. I know for a fact that they’re not designed to help people find their future spouse. Beyond having a massive gender imbalance that tends to favor women, the incentives for every dating service ensues they’ll never be good at helping people find love, even if they use advanced AI.
That’s because most every dating app relies on its users paying regular membership fees to turn a profit. And if the app works too well in that it helps people find that special someone, then those people have no reason to keep paying for a subscription. That’s why so many dating apps either become a mechanism for hook-ups or just a way to advertise porn sites.
Japan is taking those incentives out of the equation by making it a government run, not-for-profit enterprise. They’re not charging money. They’re charging time, information, and your personal energy. That helps ensure that the people who join this app actually want to find a good relationship. They provide the data. The AI provides the possible romantic connections.
Now, there’s no guarantee that the AI will be perfect at helping its users find their future spouse. In fact, I think there will be some growing pains with this dating service. Even if it attracts a large number of users, it’s going to need development, investment, and refinement.
But, like every new endeavor, it has to start somewhere. I think the early results for a non-profit AI dating app like this are certain to be mixed, at best. But if it starts working and there’s good research to back it up, then other countries facing similar problems would be wise to take notice.
And who knows? Maybe one day, an app like this will help me find my future wife.
Only time will tell.
Filed under Artificial Intelligence, futurism, romance
Why AI SHOULD Replace Most CEOs
This is a video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World.
In this video, I make the case that, of all the jobs artificial intelligence could replace, CEO should be at the top of that list. In recent years, CEOs in general have generated headlines for all the wrong reasons. With the ongoing advancements in AI, this is one job for which we should be actively trying to remove human flaws.
Filed under Artificial Intelligence, Jack's World, television, YouTube
Transformers One: A Great Movie That Deserved Better
This is a video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World.
In this video, I explore how Transformers One really raised the bar for what a Transformers movie could be. I also highlight how, despite all the things this movie did right, it did not perform well at the box office. And that’s tragic because this movie deserved so much better. Enjoy!
Filed under Jack's World, Movie Reviews, movies, YouTube
Absolute Wonder Woman: The Challenges of Reinventing Wonder Woman
This is a video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World.
In this video, I explore the emerging reinvention of Wonder Woman in the pages of the Absolute Universe. Many of DC’s iconic heroes have been reinvented before, but Wonder Woman has always presented a unique set of challenges. And so far, Absolute Wonder Woman has risen to the occasion while still leaving room for improvement. Enjoy!
Filed under DC Comics, Jack's World, Wonder Woman, YouTube
A Message To “Christians” Complaining About (Actual) Christian Tenants
In general, I try not get involved in religious discussions. Even though I talk about religion every now and then, I always make it a point to distinguish the individual from the ideology. There many good and decent people who identify as Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and plenty of other faiths. I have religious people in my own family. I love and respect them. And I make it a point to avoid talking about religion or any politics related to it.
That being said, there are some instances where I just can’t be that understanding. And in recent years, I’ve noticed the number of those instances increasing at an alarming rate. In the coming years, I may look back on 2025 as a major tipping point for me. Because that’s when the disconnect between religion and its adherents just became too vast to overlook.
The big moment came just the day after the new Presidential administration was sworn in. That’s when Bishop Mariann Budde delivered an impassioned sermon at Washington’s National Cathedral in which she urged the newly elected President to exercise mercy, compassion, and empathy for everyone. This is not a wholly unreasonable request. It’s not even overly religious, in general. It’s just basic human decency. Isn’t that exactly what you’d want for anyone who occupies a position of power or influence?
Well, apparently that was too radical, too offensive, and too un-American for many “Christians.”
And yes, I put that word in quotes for a reason. Because the people who took offense to this sermon have as much right to call themselves a Christian as I do to call myself a Wookie. In this instance, I cannot be understanding or accommodating. Because this bishop wasn’t being disrespectful or condesending. She was literally just preaching some of the most basic teachings of Jesus Christ.
You don’t need a PHD in theology to understand those teachings. Pretty much every translation of every bible says the same thing. Jesus taught his adherents to love and care for one another. He emphasized having mercy for others, even when they wrong you. That is not a radical interpretation. It’s one of the few values that Jesus and most denominations agree on.
And yet, Bishop Budde faced a severe backlash, not just from the President, but from many people who dare to identify as “Christian.” I’ve even seen a few make these long, semi-coherent rants trying to quote mine the bible or other “Christian” principles to justify their outrage. But the mere fact that this was their recourse, arguing with a Bishop who just asked people to be merciful, speaks to a disgusting hypocrisy.
Now, there’s a lot I could say about that kind of hypocrisy. I used to foolishly believe that hypocrisy was one of the few traits that most people cannot tolerate in the long run. Sadly, I was wrong. Between shifts in politics, trends, and simply dealing with these people more directly, I no longer believe that. This kind of hypocrisy isn’t a bug. It’s a feature.
What else could justify people who call themselves “Christian,” yet are deeply offended by the literal teachings of Jesus or any sermon that dares to demand adherents to exercise empathy? What happened with Bishop Budde isn’t even a one-off. There are pastors who have been forced out of their positions because parishioners complained that their teachings were too progressive, liberal, or “woke.”
Just take a moment to wrap your head around that kind of mentality. Someone who calls themselves a Christian, goes to church, listens to a sermon, and doesn’t like what a bishop or pastor says. But their first instinct isn’t to re-evaluate what it means to be a Christian. It’s to whine, complain, and protest like a kid who just found out they actually have to be good in order to get presents on Christmas.
Instead of introspection, their first instinct is to get angry and whiny. That’s childish.
Their next instinct is to go out of their way to find some justification for why the Bishop or pastor is wrong and they’re right. That’s just self-centered and self-serving.
If they’re too lazy to do that (and most of them are), their final recourse is to call whoever delivered that message some agent of evil or part of some sinister agenda. That’s just plain fucking stupid, as well as overtly narcissistic.
It basically reveals that these “Christians” don’t give a damn about teachings, principles, or anything of the sort. They just want their pastors and bishops to tell them what they already believe. They want to be vindicated in everything they feel, even if it’s wrong, dumb, cruel, or sadistic. Most importantly, they want a version of their faith that justifies them doing whatever it is they’re currently doing or whatever it is they seek to do.
Even if they seek to do the exact opposite of everything Jesus taught, they want to be justified. They want to be able to commit every sin that Jesus preached against, but still be able to call themselves “Christian” without any cognative dissonence.
I don’t doubt for a second that, in their own twisted minds, they think they’re the “true Christians.” They think that call for empathy and compassion was somehow wrong, flawed, or inappropriate. To those people, I cannot be kind or subtle with my sentiments.
If you believe that what Bishop Budde said about mercy and compassion was wrong or even just inappropriate, then you are not a Christian. You never have been. You never were. And unless you actually come to grips with what Jesus actually taught, according to the bible, you never will be.
Filed under Current Events, politics, religion
