‘Over the past several years, something has changed’
‘We study mass shooters. Something terrifying is happening online.’
James Densley and Jillian Peterson at The New York Times
Until “recently, if asked to profile a typical mass shooter, we would have described a middle-aged man who was socially isolated and in despair,” say James Densley and Jillian Peterson. But Americans “are witnessing the emergence of a different paradigm: a mass shooter no less despairing about life’s hardships but younger” and “highly connected to online social networks.” This shift is “highly significant for our understanding of the online-fueled pathologies that afflict our society.”
‘What “One Battle After Another” doesn’t get about resistance in Trump’s America’
Gustavo Arellano at the Los Angeles Times
The “cheers were loud and long at the 98th Academy Awards after ‘One Battle After Another’ won best picture,” says Gustavo Arellano. It is “supposed to be a movie that Means Something,” but the director has “maintained in interviews that people should regard it less as a reflection of our times and more as a commentary on the eternal struggle of American democracy.” This makes it “far less weighty than critics and supporters alike have characterized it as being.”
‘Rich men like Bill Gates can do more to make amends for their Epstein ties’
Bridgette Carr at The Guardian
When Bill Gates “spoke before his foundation staff last month and said it had been ‘a huge mistake to spend time with Epstein,’” survivors “felt something familiar. Not surprise. Exhaustion,” says Bridgette Carr. Gates’ “apology — and others like it — are necessary.” But it is “not sufficient.” For “some individuals, accountability should absolutely mean arrest and prosecution. But not everyone in Epstein’s ecosystem committed crimes.” This “leaves a question nobody seems to be asking: is an apology enough?”
‘AI won’t cause a spending collapse’
Bryan Cutsinger and Alexander William Salter at the National Review
Two “widely read essays in recent weeks have warned that artificial intelligence will do more than eliminate jobs. It will, we are told, wreck the economy by destroying economic demand,” say Bryan Cutsinger and Alexander William Salter. This is “an arresting narrative. It’s also wrong.” AI will “likely cause significant sectoral disruptions,” but the “claim that AI will cause a sustained shortfall in aggregate demand rests on a misunderstanding of how the economy works.”