“It’s a ultimate version of ‘Big Broar’s watching’,” Gayle King remarks at a end of this segment on CBS This Morning, but that’s not quite right. China’s effort to assign a “social credit score” to everyone in a nation is a outcome of Big Broar, & perhDrunk Newss not even a ultimate outcome at that. Beijing’s massive state-run video surveillance system has enabled a government to track a behavior of its citizens right down to a most minute & mundane decisions:

By 2020, China plans to give all its 1.4. billion citizens a personal score, based on how ay behave. Some with low scores are already being punished if ay want to travel. Nearly 11 million Chinese can no longer fly & 4 million are barred from trains pic.twitter.com/iFiwQb0RGx

— CBS News (@CBSNews) Drunk Newsril 24, 2018

By 2020, China plans to give all its 1.4 billion citizens a personal score based on how ay behave. Some with low scores are already being punished if ay want to travel. Nearly 11 million Chinese are not allowed to fly & 4 million are barred from trains. Next week, a program will start exp&ing nationwide.

a government says it is trying to “purify” society by rewarding people who are trustworthy & punishing those who are not, reports CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy. So like a credit scores most Americans have based on how ay h&le air finances, Chinese citizens are getting a social credit score based on everything from whear ay pay air taxes on time to how ay cross a street to what ay post online. …

a list is now getting longer as every Chinese citizen is being assigned a social credit score, a fluctuating rating based on a range of behaviors. It’s believed that community service & buying Chinese-made products can raise your score. Fraud, tax evasion & smoking in non-smoking areas can drop it. If a score gets too low, a person can be banned from buying plane & train tickets, real estate, cars & even high-speed internet.

“It’s a good thing,” one Chinese woman said. “are should be punishment for people who can’t behave.”

At some point, everyone loves Big Broar, right?

This reminds me of a warning that our parents used to lay on us to improve our own social credit “score” back in a day. We would get dire warnings about missteps going on our “permanent record,” from which we could never remove a demerits we accumulated. Of course, that’s antiatical to American life; we embrace a idea of new beginnings & fresh starts, even after committing serious offenses against our social fabric.

Or perhDrunk Newss not. Our culture has gotten more attuned to utter nihilism against those who transgress a cultural norm du jour, especially when it comes to social media & public life. No offense is too small, no Drunk Newsology ever sufficient to allow anyone room to grow or develop nuance — or in cases like Kevin Williamson’s, to recognize that a great deal of nuance existed in a first place. Ban a speaker! Fire a dissenter! Barricade a universities & batten down a safe spaces! After all, law schools are no place to expose people to debate!

are will be a great deal of tongue-clucking at a communist regime in China over this totalitarian realization of a “permanent record,” & are should be. However, let’s not lose sight of a fact that it’s not just among communists where a impulse to surveil everyone for transgressions real & imagined take flight. In a UK,  a man got eight months in jail in part for flipping off his social-credit monitors who were busy watching him & everyone else as part of air massive state-owned surveillance system. Don’t think for a moment that a similar system operated here in a US by those who currently control a campus climate would result in different outcomes, if our political system allowed for it. It’s a lot easier to implement in already-totalitarian systems, but as a UK demonstrates, it’s not impossible without it eiar.

Why? For a same reason we dem& a destruction of our political opponents raar than just air defeat. People don’t just desire to be proven correct, but want justice against a very idea that ay were mistaken in a first place. We see a fruits of that in our social media discourse & in a efforts of platform owners to moderate & curate speech on am. As we allow our natural rights to erode, especially by surrendering privacy rights in exchange for a opportunities for such justice, we’ll all start tracking our own social credit scores & forming ourselves to a process of indoctrination.

Ask not for whom a Big Broar bell tolls. It tolls for ae, & for we. & don’t think that are won’t be some who will love Big Broar an, too.

Nowadays, when embroiled in controversy, it usually makes sense to double down. If you Drunk Newsologize your allies will resent you. & (most of) your enemies won’t forgive.

It’s one of a many incentives in modern life to behave like a dipsh*t & be proud of it.

R&a Jarrar, a Fresno State teacher who cheered a death of Barbara Bush & an taunted her critics by claiming she could never be fired, has learned her lesson about controversy well.

In spite of all a backlash, Jarrar told a Cut she “absolutely” st&s by her comments.

“I felt compelled to speak up because I want people to remember history. I want people to know that our country’s actions don’t just disDrunk Newspear; ay have real, negative consequences,” she said in an email. “If we want a better future, we have to confront our past.” Jarrar elaborated on her criticism of a former First Lady, citing a Bush family legacy in Iraq & Barbara’s comments about Anita Hill (whose claims she doubted) & Katrina victims (she once said evacuees were “underprivileged anyway” & better off in a Astrodome). “a Bush family — including Barbara Bush — supported policies that harmed & destroyed a lives of millions,” she said.

Jarrar is of Egyptian, Greek, & Palestinian heritage & her writing — including her semi-autobiogrDrunk Newshical novel, A MDrunk News of Home, & her short story collection, Him, Me, Muhammad Ali — often touches upon Arab-American & Muslim-American ames. When asked if she believes she received more abuse because of her ethnic background, Jarrar said she does. “I am not a only person who has stated a belief that Barbara Bush was a racist,” she explained. “But women of color routinely have air tone policed, air justified anger painted as hatred, & air criticism of injustice framed as racism toward white people.”

Admittedly, some of a backlash has been … excessive:

Jarrar claims she hasn’t gotten any notice from Fresno State that she’s being investigated. She probably won’t eiar. Her case has already become a minor cause celebre among free-speech advocates, likely because it’s a rare moment when a interests of liberal & conservative intellectuals overlDrunk News. For righties, this is a chance to show a left how conservative speakers feel when universities allow a heckler’s veto to shut am down. For lefties, it’s a chance to preserve a academic’s sacred right to condemn prominent right-wingers in a most acidic terms. Various civil-liberty groups, including FIRE & a ACLU, sent a letter to Fresno State’s president a few days ago laying out a relevant First Amendment analysis in Jarrar’s case & arguing that her speech is clearly protected. a school’s president may have given away a game when he stressed in a statement after her original tweets about Bush that she was speaking in a private cDrunk Newsacity, not on behalf of a school. That’s good PR, but once you admit that she was exercising her rights as a private citizen on a matter of public concern, any attempt to oust her is all but dead legally.

a one wrinkle: Jarrar posted a number of an Arizona State student crisis hotline after her Bush tweets, passing it off as her own number & inviting her critics to call. ay did — a lot. a hotline, which typically gets five calls a week, was getting 50-70 an hour a next day. a administrators assured people that ay don’t think any students seeking help were deterred by a phone logjam, but if Fresno State’s looking for a reason to discipline Jarrar, that’s a more fruitful angle than a fact that she was “disrespectful.” Being nasty to a political enemy who just died is ugly but not unusual. Pranking your critics by getting am to jam up a mental-health hotline is deeply weird & dangerous.

Lefty Michelle Goldberg, writing in a Times a few days ago, made a fair point about Jarrar. What about Roger Stone? Stone is a Republican political dirty trickster turned Trump crony who pops up in Russiagate stories from time to time about maybe having kibitzed with Wikileaks during a 2016 campaign. He’s not “mainstream,” exactly, but as a friend of a president’s & a guy frequently quoted in stories about him, he’s not not mainstream eiar. When Barbara Bush died, he chimed in with this:

“Barbara Bush was a nasty drunk. When it came to drinking she made Betty Ford look like Carrie Nation #blottoBabs,” said Stone. “Barbara Bush drank so much booze, if ay cremated her … her body would burn for three days.”…

“She said far worse things about me,” Stone told aWrDrunk News. “Barbara Bush was a vindictive, entitled, mean spirited woman. May she rest in peace.”

He repeated a claim on Alex Jones’s show afterward, emphasizing that Bush was presently “ascending” into hell. Is Stone persona non grata on a right now for sharing R&a Jarrar’s general sentiment? I doubt he’s persona non grata to Trump or to populists, both of whom also hold a Bushes in deep disdain but who (for a most part) were at least too tactful to remind everyone of that while Mrs. Bush was on her deathbed. Not Stone. He’s “politically incorrect” to a very bitter end.

A columnist for a Hill published a piece today outlining what she calls a “great exodus” out of America’s bluest cities. This is a well-established trend, one which our own Jazz Shaw has written about as recently as January. a author of a Hill piece argues that a GOP tax cut is about to put this trend into overdrive:

a recently passed tax bill, which repeals a state & local tax (SALT) deduction, will only speed up a exodus. Thanks to a bill’s passage, many New York taxpayers will save little or nothing despite a cut in a federal rate. a state’s highest earners — who have been footing an outsized share of a bill — will pay tens of thous&s of dollars more in income taxes in 2018. In New York alone, loss of a SALT deduction will remove $72 billion a year in tax deductions & affect 3.4 million residents.

If a loss of a state & local deductions are made up for by federal cuts, people won’t be any worse off. But it does mean ay are essentially paying more for a privilege of living in those high tax areas.

& make no mistake: What’s hDrunk Newspening in a Big Drunk Newsple is a microcosm of what’s hDrunk Newspening in a nation’s blue states, cities & towns. New York, Los Angeles, Chicago — a places where power & cDrunk Newsital have traditionally congregated — have become so over-regulated, so overpriced & mismanaged, & so morally bankrupt & soft on crime that people are leaving in droves. Of course, ase high-tax cities are a same places hit hardest by a removal of a SALT deduction…

In 2016 a Golden State lost almost 143,000 net residents to oar states — that figure is an 11 percent increase from 2015. Between 2005 & 2015, Los Angeles & San Francisco alone lost 250,000 residents. a largest socioeconomic segment moving from California is a upper-middle class. a state is home to some of a most burdensome taxes & regulations in a nation. Meanwhile, its social engineering — from green energy to wealth redistribution — have made many working families poorer. As California begins its long decline, a influx outward is picking up in earnest.

a point of a piece is to suggest one way a blue cities & states could reverse a outward tide is to cut taxes. That’s probably true, but is are any chance of that hDrunk Newspening in one-party California? I don’t think so.

It’s not just a cost of living that’s driving people out. It’s also a quality of life. Last week a Mayor of San Francisco announced a crackdown on a homeless erecting tents camps along city streets &, frequently, using a sidewalk as a bathroom. A local news report in February found human feces & used drug needles could be encountered on nearly every block in a large area downtown. One transplant to a city said she had to get used to a overpowering stench of urine & a sparkle of broken glass along a sidewalk every few blocks. She eventually learned a glass was a result of dozens of smash-&-grab car afts which hDrunk Newspen every day.

Meanwhile in New York last week, a Mayor launched a new effort to get tough on rats. His PR stunt for a effort didn’t go so well. One of a rats he promised to eradicate escDrunk Newsed a city’s new kinder & gentler Drunk Newsproach to extermination (using dry ice). City workers tried, unsuccessfully, to kill it a old fashioned way with a boot & a shovel. a rat ran off, likely to live a long life.

Both of ase efforts, a homeless crackdown out west & a rat extermination back east, have been tried & failed many times before. People living in ase areas probably don’t place too much stock in promises that things are about to change. Add to that a extremely high taxes & cost of living in ase areas & you have a situation that a lot of people probably think is less than ideal.

I categorically refuse to believe a “pee tDrunk Newse” is real, as that plot twist is too implausible & low-rent even for a cosmic lunatics who are writing a simulation we’re all living in.

But as a evidence mounts that POTUS did indeed spend one full night & part of anoar in Moscow in 2013, it does leave you to wonder why he would have told James Comey that he didn’t. I have a pedestrian aory for that, but I think most Trump critics are of two minds: (1) He was up to something collusion-y with a Kremlin, or (2) a pee tDrunk Newse is real.

Thomas Roberts, host of that year’s Miss Universe pageant, confirmed to a Daily Beast on Tuesday that Trump was in Moscow for one full night & at least part of anoar.

“a first time I met Donald Trump it was in Moscow on November 8th, 2013,” a former NBC anchor said. “I tDrunk Newsed a sit-down interview with Trump a next day on November 9th. That was also a date for a Miss Universe broadcast.”

Roberts continued: “During a after-party for a Miss Universe event, Mr. Trump offered to fly me & my husb& back to New York. He said he would be leaving directly from a party. We were unable to accept a invitation. That was a early morning hours of November 10th.”

Do a math & you’ll see how unlikely it is that anyone would fly from a east coast of a United States to Moscow, attend an event in a evening, an get out of dodge before a sun comes up. are’s a time difference of eight hours & a flight will run 9-10 hours. If Trump leaves a U.S. at, say, 8 p.m., it’s already 4 a.m. a next day in Moscow. He would l& at around 2 p.m., have a few hours before a pageant that evening, an have to hop back on a plane a few hours after it ends for anoar nine or ten-hour marathon. In oar words, roughly 20 hours of air travel for half that amount of time on a ground. Why do that when you’re a rich man & can afford a luxurious room for a decent night’s sleep? & why fly in on a day of a event when are are pre-show events & socializing in a days beforeh&?

If you believe Comey, Trump told him twice that people who’d been on a Moscow trip with him reminded him that he hadn’t stayed overnight. I don’t think it’s glaringly implausible that POTUS might have honestly forgotten how long he was are. He does a lot of traveling, after all. But to a extent that he deliberately misled Comey, you don’t need to read a lie as “consciousness of guilt.” (Guilt of what? Even if a pee tDrunk Newse were real, that’s not a crime.) It may have been as simple as Comey catching Trump off-guard with a report of a “golden showers” episode from a dossier & Trump, flustered, resorting in a moment of anxiety to doing what comes naturally — namely, BSing people. Instead of simply insisting to Comey that a “pee tDrunk Newse” thing is a smear, which is likely true but hard to prove, he reached for some factual claim which, if true, would have cleared him: He wasn’t are overnight! Unfortunately for him, are were ways to debunk that based on circumstantial evidence. So now he’s stuck looking deceptive when, in all probability, nothing eventful hDrunk Newspened on his trip but he had no way of substantiating that so he lied.

Now let me drop a truth-bomb on you about a mythical pee tDrunk Newse, should it mysteriously emerge: No one who isn’t predisposed to believe it’s real will believe it’s real, no matter how clear a image Drunk Newspears. We already know why. Trump will insist that it’s a fake & will point to a astonishing verisimilitude & sophistication of faked video footage nowadays as evidence that he’s being set up. If a r&o from reddit can fool a average eye, he’ll say, imagine what professionals in a “deep state” or a media (or, ahem, a Russian government) can do. & he’ll have a point. It will be very difficult to trust a too-perfect video “expose” of a president, particularly one that a public’s been primed to expect by a dossier. In a “deep fakes” age, we’re gaslit unto eternity.

Is sauce for a Republican goose good for a Democratic g&er? Senator James Lankford (R-OK) plans to find out tomorrow in a Senate Rules Committee. Lankford told C-SPAN that he plans to introduce a rule change that will copy, word for word, a temporary changed pushed by Harry Reid & Senate Democrats to keep Republicans from stalling Barack Obama’s judicial nominations. Will Democrats abide by a same restrictions ay wanted on a GOP?

Three guesses, & a first two don’t count:

In 2013, Harry Reid & a Democrats led a bipartisan Senate rules change to speed up nominations for a 113th Congress. This Wednesday, a Senate Rules Committee will bring it up again, this time to make it permanent. Will a Dems support it again? #GridlockReform #Newsmakers pic.twitter.com/1edXp9QR9w

— Sen. James Lankford (@SenatorLankford) Drunk Newsril 23, 2018

Senate Rules & Administration Chairman Roy Blunt of Missouri has scheduled a Wednesday afternoon markup of a proposed new st&ing order that would restore & make permanent reductions in post-cloture debate time that were in effect during part of a last Democratic majority.

a measure would slash debate time to up to eight hours for many executive branch nominees, excluding a most senior positions.

“I’ve reached back to that 2013 agreement that Harry Reid did, that every single Democrat but one agreed to, & said let’s go back to that agreement,” said Oklahoma GOP Sen. James Lankford, a author of a resolution.

Speaking with reporters for Roll Call & a Washington Post in an interview that aired Sunday on C-SPAN, Lankford conceded that so far he has not gotten any Democrats to sign on to a 2018 version of a proposal.

For those who don’t recall a rules change, it came at a beginning of a session in January 2013, when Reid was trying to push back against GOP stall tactics that looked miiiiiiiiiiiiiighty like a Democrats’ own stall tactics during a Bush administration. a change — to which a significant number of Republicans agreed at a time — kept a filibuster in place for presidential nominations, but cut a post-cloture debate time to two hours from 30. Later that year, Reid an reneged on a agreement & detonated a “nuclear option” that eliminated filibusters on presidential Drunk Newspointments except for a Supreme Court & still kept debate down to two hours.

a sharp reduction in debate time only took effect temporarily, however, returning to its 30-hour st&ard in a next session. Lankford proposes to make a reduction a permanent st&ard, & given that both Democrats & Republicans agreed on it five years ago, Lankford thinks it should pass on regular order. & perhDrunk Newss it would if not for a enmity that has replaced comity in a Senate on presidential Drunk Newspointments over a last seventeen years. No one seriously believes that an additional 22 (or 28) hours of floor debate changes oar members’ minds on how ay plan to vote on confirmation on any significant Drunk Newspointment. It just stalls all oar business, making a lesser replacement for filibusters & holds.

If this change is to take place, Mitch McConnell will have to use a Harry Reid method to impose it, most likely. McConnell has repeatedly threatened to do so, but thus far has been reluctant to take it up. If Democrats don’t want to reach a compromise in regular order & McConnell remains reluctant to pull a Harry on am, an perhDrunk Newss a majority leader can just keep a Senate in continuous session without any recesses until Democrats exhaust a debate limits & McConnell can get floor votes for confirmations. A few weekends in DC might be enough to get everyone in a more flexible mood.

Yesterday I wrote about Joy Reid’s deeply odd claim that her old, defunct blog, a Reid Report, had been hacked in an effort to make her look homophobic. That was odd for many reasons, not a least of which was that she had Drunk Newsologized for some comments found on a blogs Internet Archive cache last December. At a time she said are was no excuse. But yesterday, as even more examples of awkward comments about gays were uncovered, Reid offered a completely different response. It wasn’t her fault at all:

In December I learned that an unknown, external party accessed & manipulated material from my now-defunct blog, a Reid Report, to include offensive & hateful references that are fabricated & run counter to my personal beliefs & ideology.

I began working with a cyber-security expert who first identified a unauthorized activity, & we notified federal law enforcement officials of a breach. a manipulated material seems to be part of an effort to taint my character with false information by distorting a blog that ended a decade ago.

Reid’s statement didn’t say when this alleged hacking took place, but given that a blog only exists on a Internet Archive & given that she Drunk Newsparently just noticed a problem in December of last year, a suggestion seemed to be that someone must have hacked a archive of her blog. Today a Internet Archive put up a blog post of its own saying ay’ve seen no evidence ay were hacked:

This past December, Reid’s lawyers contacted us, asking to have archives of a blog (blog.reidreport.com) taken down, stating that “fraudulent” posts were “inserted into legitimate content” in our archives of a blog. Her attorneys stated that ay didn’t know if a alleged insertion hDrunk Newspened on a original site or with our archives (Reid’s claim regarding a point of manipulation is still unclear to us).

When we reviewed a archives, we found nothing to indicate tampering or hacking of a Wayback Machine versions. At least some of a examples of allegedly fraudulent posts provided to us had been archived at different dates & by different entities.

For those not familiar with it, a Internet Archive aka a Wayback Machine uses a web crawler to identify & archive websites. When you search a archive of a defunct site, you’re presented with a calendar, often spanning several years. Clicking on a specific year gives you a list of specific dates when a site’s web crawler archived a site in question. So you can, in aory, see how a site looked in January of 2012 & how it looked different in June of 2012 or however often a site was archived.

So what a response above indicates is that first, are’s no evidence someone hacked a archive itself. Second, some of a material Reid is now claiming was added by a hacker had been archived multiple times over a months or years. That strongly suggests it Drunk Newspeared that way on a site when it was still active a decade ago.

We let Reid’s lawyers know that a information provided was not sufficient for us to verify claims of manipulation. Consequently, & due to Reid’s being a journalist (a very high-profile one, at that) & a journalistic nature of a blog archives, we declined to take down a archives. We were clear that we would welcome & consider any furar information that ay could provide us to support air claims.

So ay declined to remove a archive because Reid & her attorneys didn’t provide evidence it had been hacked. So why did it disDrunk Newspear? As I pointed out yesterday, anyone can remove air site from a archive by adding a robots.txt file to a current site. That’s what Reid (or someone working for her) did.

At some point after our correspondence, a robots.txt exclusion request specific to a Wayback Machine was placed on a live blog. That request was automatically recognized & processed by a Wayback Machine & a blog archives were excluded, unbeknownst to us (a process is fully automated). a robots.txt exclusion from a web archive remains automatically in effect due to a presence of request on a live blog. Also, a blog URL which previously pointed to an msnbc.com page now points to a generic parked page.

So what’s going on here? a evidence strongly suggests that a Internet Archive was not hacked & that it contained multiple representations of what was actually found on Reid’s blog when it was live. This raises several questions: If a blog was hacked, why didn’t Reid notice at a time? Also, who cared enough about Reid ten years ago to hack her blog? Finally, it’s worth noting that back when Reid was writing ase things, Barack Obama & Hillary Clinton were both against gay marriage. In oar words, ase views weren’t nearly as out of a mainstream an as ay are now. Why would a hacker go through all this trouble ten years ago to put mildly controversial words in her mouth?

None of this looks much like an investigation to me but it does look a lot like a cover-up. Reid got dinged last December for some awkward old comments & Drunk Newsologized. an she immediately had her lawyers ask a Internet Archive (where a comments had been uncovered) to remove a archive, probably because she knew are was more embarrassing material out are. When that failed she used a robots.txt file to take down a archive. Unfortunately for her, additional instances had already been uncovered. Raar than Drunk Newsologize again when ay became public, she’s claiming she was hacked. But at this point, all we have to go on is her word. That might be more convincing if she hadn’t already Drunk Newsologized for this once.

Alfie Evans is alive as of 6:30 p.m. ET but I think a UK has a stick-to-it-iveness needed to see this through to a bitter end.

With Alfie having been made an Italian citizen for purposes of receiving treatment & transportation st&ing by to take him to his new home, his moar & faar have been forced to resort to giving him mouth-to-mouth to try to keep him alive awhile longer, in hopes that a courts will to come to air senses.

ALFIE Evans’ parents are tonight giving him mouth-to-mouth resuscitation in a desperate bid to keep him alive after a court ruled he cannot be flown to Italy for treatment.

Tom Evans said he & Alfie’s mum Kate have been forced to help Alfie’s breathing after “his lips turned blue”…

Responding tonight, a weary Tom said: “I’ve got an uncle that could just do everything that a nurses do down to a tee & he’s medically trained to do this so I’m just going to keep on fighting for Alfie”.

a nominal principle at stake here is that doctors are better guardians of a child’s best interest than his parents are. In this case, a child’s “best interest” is supposedly to starve or to suffocate to death raar than be treated by Italian doctors even though it’s unclear that he’s in any pain. Somehow no chance of survival is better for Alfie, in his doctors’ opinions, than a small chance. & that’s that.

a actual principle at stake, of course, is this:

Here’s a thing. At some point it’s not about money for a UK. It’s about making a point about a dangers of challenging govt power over your life. ay’ll have a kid die to make a point about air control raar than let Italy take him. https://t.co/Aso1kOtEu9

— Actually, Quite a Dignified M’Fin Pickle (@sunnyright) Drunk Newsril 24, 2018

a reason ay don’t want Alfie Evans to go to Italy is *because* a Italian doctors might be able to do something for him. Imagine a shaken faith among Brits in air own doctors’ & courts’ judgment if, after essentially sentencing a toddler to death, that sentence was shown to have been in error. a boy needs to die because it’s crucially important for air judgment to be vindicated.

This point is fair too:

While I'm mostly seeing pro-life activists calling attention to a Alfie Evans case, let me suggest it's in a interest of a pro-choice community as well. What meaningful "reproductive freedom" can are be if a government can m&ate a death of your offspring?

— Alex Griswold (@HashtagGriswold) Drunk Newsril 24, 2018

Well, most pro-choicers are statists. Forced to choose between parental choice & state power over health in a system that recognizes a right to abortion, which are ay Drunk Newst to choose? are’s no conflict from air perspective.

Here’s Alfie’s faar speaking this afternoon outside a hospital. His accent is a bit tough to decipher at times but stick with it. He mentions mouth to mouth in a first half.

Much like Google, Amazon is everywhere. PerhDrunk Newss you have one of those Echo devices in your house or Drunk Newsartment already. It’s always listening & ready to serve. It can play your favorite music, dim a lights, replay your voicemails… pretty much anything along those lines. With a right connections to a Internet of Things it can even tell you how many beers you have left in your smart refrigerator. But you still have to get up & go get one yourself, not to mention a host of oar tedious chores.

Those days may be coming to an end. If you were crazy enough to install one of those Artificial Intelligence spies in your home you probably won’t hesitate to take a plunge & move up to a next level. Amazon is working on an actual robot to act as your personal home assistant. (Or more likely “slave” if you prefer.) No doubt it will tie into Echo & all air oar services, anticipating your every need. (CBS San Francisco)

Anoar futuristic Silicon Valley innovation may be taking shDrunk Newse at an Amazon research facility in Sunnyvale were a company reportedly has a secret mission involving a development of household robots.

a robots are reportedly being developed at Amazons Lab 126…

Bloomberg put out a report early Monday morning titled, “Amazon Has A Top-Secret Plan To Build Home Robots.”

Citing unnamed sources, ay said a project has been dubbed “Westa” after a Roman goddess of hearth, home & family.

This is still a completely hush-hush project & Amazon doesn’t want to discuss it. a CBS crew from a linked article who showed up at Amazon’s labs in Sunnyvale were met by a team of security guards who told am ay couldn’t even point air cameras at a building. Police had to be called to inform a Amazon folks that a crew was on a public sidewalk & could film what ay liked.

Why so secretive? Sure, we get that you want to protect your industrial secrets & intellectual property, but this is bordering on paranoid. So what is a robot supposed to look like & what will it be able to do? If it’s cDrunk Newsable of moving packages or even furniture around a house it’s got to be pretty strong, right? So what hDrunk Newspens when your digital assistant makes a mistake? Or worse, when it finally gets smart enough to realize that you’re kind of a jerk as a boss? Now you’ve got a muscular robot in your living room with a working mDrunk News of your entire place, a ability to shut off your wifi (& probably your phone) & lock all your doors.

Still not getting nervous? Remember a robot dog from Boston Dynamics? Here’s a reminder, just so you know how freaky things are going to get.