The War on Drugs

Posted on June 25, 2025 by bvanrysdam

There is a turf war taking place over cannabis, but it’s not between drug cartels, but rather the Texas republican party.

Gov. Gregg Abbott vetoed Senate Bill 3 which have banned consumable hemp products that contained any THC, including delta-8 and delta-9. The bill was championed by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick who accused Abbott of wanting to “legalize marijuana” by regulating hemp products. Abbott contends the bill would have faced “valid constitutional challenges” and would have kept it tied up in court for years. He called the legislature back to Austin for a special session next month to pass stricter rules for products that contain THC.

Patrick has dug his heels in saying he was “staying with a ban,” and continues to insist that there are not enough law enforcement to regulate Texas’ more than 8,000 THC retailers and has even dared Texans to vote him out over THC ban.

It is worth going back to the 2019 legislative session when House Bill 1325 was passed into law which related to the production and regulation of hemp; requiring occupational licenses; authorizing fees; creating criminal offenses and providing civil and administrative penalties.

The so-called “Hemp Bill” took the drug off the list of controlled substances in Texas, as long as products such as CBD oil contain no more than 0.3 percent THC, the psychoactive ingredient that gives users their buzz. It is important to note that while legally manufactured and distributed in Texas, the processing and manufacturing of smokable hemp products is prohibited in the state.

So, what happened? It seems measuring the difference between legal THC (0.3 percent) and illegal THC (0.4 percent) requires very special equipment which is not readily available and expensive. Some estimates at the time projected the equipment and training for 25 new employees to be around $5.5 million annually.

Since no funding was provided to help local law enforcement, many district attorneys delayed, or even dropped low-level marijuana cases leading Abbott to proclaim, “Marijuana has not been decriminalized in Texas”.

SB3 would have banned most consumable hemp-derived products, allowing only those with zero or near-zero THC to remain on the market.

The Texas Department of Public Safety testified to state budget officials that the bill would need to be funded to work and were told before they voted that H.B. 1325 was going to make prosecuting marijuana a lot tougher. Democratic state Rep. Tracy King’s office was told that, without funds for new lab testing, the legislation would “essentially legalize marijuana.”

Patrick claims THC retailers are exploiting a loophole in the law, but who wrote and voted to pass the law in the first place? Much like approving ERCOT to purchase millions of dollars in back-up generator equipment that was basically useless during Hurricane Beryl (even though there was plenty of public testimony saying that was not a good idea) and allowing the Texas lottery to operate with no real over-sight (until the fake news Houston Chronicle brought it to their attention how they got played) it seems the Texas legislature is good at pointing the finger at everyone but themselves.

A newly released economic report from Whitney Economics, “Hemp-Derived Cannabinoids in the Lone Star State: A Revisit of the Economic Impact Analysis of Cannabinoid Retail in Texas”, reports the hemp industry is a major contributor to the Texas economy, generating $5.5 billion in annual sales with an estimated tax revenue of $268 million. In addition, the report estimated total employment in the hemp industry grew to 53,300 jobs in 2025, an increase of 3,200 from 50,100 in 2023.

Abbott has called lawmakers back to Austin for a special session beginning July 21 with consumable hemp regulation at the top of the agenda. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out once the smoke clears.

Education under the microscope

Posted on May 14, 2025 by bvanrysdam

The world of education is, once again, being tested by forces outside the school hallways. The most recent skirmish is President Donald Trump’s administration cutting another $450 million in grants to Harvard University after the Ivy League school pushed back against government allegations that it’s a hotbed of liberalism and antisemitism.

In a letter to Harvard, a federal antisemitism task force said the school will lose grants from eight federal agencies in addition to $2.2 billion that was previously frozen by the Trump administration. The letter said Harvard has become a “breeding ground for virtue signaling and discrimination” and faces a “steep, uphill battle” to reclaim its legacy as a place of academic excellence.

This isn’t just taking place nationally, Texas Lt. Governor Dan Patrick is taking state universities to task. He recently threatened that institutions of higher education would get less funding if they don’t “kick DEI out of their schools.” Both the House and the Senate shared their state budget proposals, with both versions eliminating the institutional enhancement fund that provided $423 million to Texas universities in the last budget cycle to provide the proverbial “slap upside the head” for universities to pay attention.

Patrick has long embraced conservative dissatisfaction in higher education, accusing universities of indoctrinating students with leftist beliefs. Texas was one of the first states to ban DEI offices and programs in public universities, all with Patrick’s full support.

It’s not the first-time higher education has butted heads with authorities who tried to dictate what is being taught. The Condemnations at the medieval University of Paris in 1201 were put in place by the Bishop of Paris to curb certain teachings as being heretical by the church, who at the time could be considered as powerful as any government.

The writings of several medieval scholars were condemned, apparently for pantheism (the belief that reality, the universe, and nature are identical to divinity or a supreme entity). It also stated that: “neither the books of Aristotle on natural philosophy nor their commentaries are to be read in Paris in public or secret, and this we forbid under penalty of excommunication.”

The debate on what should be taught is not only taking place in higher education, but also in grades K-12. What books are appropriate to be used and including a poster of the Ten Commandments to be included in every classroom are just some of the key issues teachers and students face.

Texas recently enacted a new law allowing public funds to be used for private school tuition through education savings accounts, commonly known as school vouchers. Senate Bill 2 will begin with the 2026-27 school year and will initially have a $1 billion cap but could potentially grow to $4.5 billion per year by 2030.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (who is now running for U.S. Senate attempting to unseat Texas Senator John Cornyn) said in a statement “this universal school choice bill is a historic step in ensuring that students will have the freedom to seek the educational option that is right for them, not be trapped in schools that fail to meet their academic needs.”

The question that begs to be raised is why the state is not meeting students’ academic needs in the first place. Texas, which is led by the Republican party, does not seem to be interested in taking responsibility for poor performance grades but rather point the finger toward woke agendas and democratic cities.

According to the Nation’s Report Card, a resource offering a common measure of student achievement, the average reading score for Texas eighth graders was significantly lower than the national average in 2024. The nation’s average reading scores also declined for both fourth and eighth grade, with only three states scoring lower than Texas in both grades.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has long supported using tax-payer vouchers to help families place their children in private schools saying “gone are the days that families are limited to only the schools assigned by government. The day has arrived that empowers parents to choose the school that is best for their child.”

You really don’t have to wonder why people don’t have confidence in Texas teaching their children. The track record of the Texas legislature has in dealing with power grid outages and lottery shenanigans have left many of us wondering who is minding the store.

And, if all that isn’t enough, Rep. Stan Gerdes introduced a bill known as the Furriers Act (with the support of the governor and speaker of the house), which would ban non-human behaviors in public schools, including the use of litter boxes. Never mind the fact that he could not prove or point to a single incident of this occurring anywhere.

The tide of attacking education may be turning (at least in some parts of Texas). Several local independent school districts recently held board of trustees’ election with many conservatives losing their seats and the public calling for the removal of policies regarding book bans and transgender students that were once championed.

Society can be like a pendulum that swings back and forth. For the last several years, that pendulum has swung to the far right but maybe it’s time for it to come back to the middle and not focus on politically motivated policies such as book banning or litter boxes but focus on policies that directly help students.

How a football fans food fixation came to be

Posted on February 13, 2025 by bvanrysdam

It can be argued the two most essential elements of what it means to be a westerner New Yorker are the Buffalo Bills and chicken wings. Jim Kelly or Josh Allen? The Anchor Bar or Duffs? These debates help make up the fabric of what being a Buffalonian is all about. What might surprise you though is the unlikely connection the Buffalo Bills and chicken wings have.

During the early years of the franchise, the Buffalo Bills featured a fierce running back named Cookie Gilchrist. For three seasons Gilchrist was an unstoppable force that no one could handle. His talents helped propel the Bills to their first AFL title in 1964 with the fans chanting “Lookie, Lookie here comes Cookie!”.

*Cookie Gilchrist in an early AFL game versus the Houston Oilers*

Gilchrist originally signed with the Cleveland Browns as an undrafted practice squad member in 1954 right out of high school which violated NFL rules, forcing him to play professional football in Canada before joining the Bills. Gilchrist was the first 1,000-yard American Football League rusher, with 1,096 yards in a 14-game schedule earning AFL MVP honors in 1962.

At the same time Gilchrist was tearing up the AFL, a restaurateur named John Young opened Wings & Things, becoming the first to promote chicken wings in the Buffalo telephone book. Young’s wings were uncut, breaded, deep-fried, and served with his secret, tomato-based Mambo Sauce, which is similar to barbecue sauce, but sweeter and a little spicier.

Around the same time, a couple named Frank and Teressa Bellissimo began selling chicken wings at the Anchor Bar, about a mile away from Wings & Things and have been credited by some for coming up with the concept, but Young insisted Frank would stop by his restaurant where he discovered them (in reality, the tasty treat can actually be traced back to 1857 when they were a featured entrée at the Clarendon Hotel).

*Menu from the Clarendon Hotel courtesy of the Buffalo History Museum*

Young, an African American entrepreneur, relied on word of mouth to promote his restaurant which struggled to keep its doors open. He didn’t have marketing dollars to promote his wings and the future looked bleak until a local football player walked in and started what would eventually lead to a $25 billion industry. That player was Gilchrist who was a hero in the Buffalo black community and word soon spread about Young’s restaurant and his chicken wings.

“People would come in buy 500 at a time and take them to the game,” said Adam Richman, food historian. “They have distinct memories of buying them from John Young.”

Wings & Things was located 6 blocks from War Memorial Stadium, home of the Buffalo Bills, which made it easy for fans to skip the stale popcorn and other bland concession items and enjoy what would become a football fans food fixation. Soon other celebrities including James Brown, Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes and Curtis Mayfield would stop by the restaurant to enjoy what would become a national obsession.

The mid-60’s was a turbulent time for African Americans. Gilchrist was an early civil rights advocate for black athletes and led a successful boycott of New Orleans as the site of the 1965 AFL All-Star game after numerous black players were refused service by area hotels and businesses (the game was moved to Houston’s Jeppesen Stadium).

Sadly, race riots forced Young to close his restaurant which was located in a predominantly black neighborhood, but thanks to his determination and the support of one of the greatest Buffalo Bills of all time, the relationship between the team and his chicken wing are forever linked together in history.

Will AI art go the way of Napster?

Posted on January 29, 2025 by bvanrysdam

Artificial Intelligence (AI) continues to make headlines. Most recently, a Chinese company rocked the investment world when it introduced DeepSeek resulting in a panic (some pundits called it a “Sputnik moment”). Nvidia, a U.S. computing infrastructure company lost an astounding $593 billion of its market value (a record one-day loss for any company on Wall Street) after the DeepSeek news broke.

John Stewart, host of the “The Daily Show”, quipped is anyone excited “that AI had its job replaced by AI?”[1] There is a certain amount of irony here.

There are so many elements to the AI discussion, but we’re going to focus on AI art, software that allows someone to “transform your artistic concepts into reality”.[2]

So how does that work? AI art software takes original images that have been scrubbed from the internet and then used to train the A.I. models to generate an image from a text prompt. The software takes the downloaded images and runs them through an image classifier to create a set of labels. It then takes those images and their labels and feeds them into a database to generate a text-to-image model.

That all sounds harmless, except some artists began noticing AI knockoffs or copies of their work. Is that stealing, or simply imitating? Regardless, the person who originally created the art isn’t getting paid and that is causing some to raise questions on the legality of all of this.

Let’s pause for a moment and jump into Mr. Peabody’s time machine[3] to travel back to 1999 and fondly look back at Napster, a peer-to-peer music download software which used a centralized database that housed a list of all songs being shared by connected users. While extremely popular (the service boasted around 80 million registered users at its height), it could not function without the Napster central database.

Musicians, as you might imagine, were not happy when people began sharing their songs via the music sharing platform and not getting paid. Napster ran into legal difficulties over copyright infringement and ceased operations in 2001 after losing multiple lawsuits. It eventually filed for bankruptcy in June 2002.[4]

The same issue is now taking place with AI art, but on a much grander scale. Computers are scouring the internet, looking for images to add to their databases ready for someone else to use them and create AI art. It is estimated that millions, perhaps billions of images are being saved.

There are ways for artists to protect their work. Ben Zhao, professor of Computer Sciences at the University of Chicago recently explained on the podcast “Freakonomics”[5] how he developed an app called Nightshade that “poisons” the image with incorrect data. Nightshade sprinkles a few invisible pixels of the poison on the original work so that the A.I. model will see something entirely different which causes the software to incorrectly use images thus making them unusable.

A recent ruling by the U.S. Copyright Office determined that most AI art is not protected because copyright law is primarily intended to protect the work of human creators and not computers[6]. This means if someone creates an image/artwork using AI, anyone else can copy and paste with no threat of legal action, but that is of little solace to the original artist whose work is taken/scrubbed/stolen and used for profit by someone else.

Big tech is spending big money to develop AI software, but the law is slowly starting to catch up. Open AI and Microsoft are being sued by the New York Times who argue millions of copyrighted works from news organizations were used without consent or payment. Other publishers like the Associated Press, News Corp. and Vox Media have reached content-sharing deals with OpenAI.

It’s not a new phenomenon when technology races ahead of regulations, so how to make sense of it all? Simple, follow the lawyers and the money.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/thedailyshow

[2] https://openart.ai/

[3] https://kids.kiddle.co/Wayback_Machine_(Peabody%27s_Improbable_History)

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napster

[5] https://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-to-poison-an-a-i-machine/

[6] https://www.copyright.gov/ai/

Video did not kill the radio star

Posted on December 20, 2024 by bvanrysdam

The holidays can be the most wonderful time of the year unless you work in radio. December is when the corporate suits look for ways to cut costs and reduce budgets (aka: fire staff). Here in Houston, two very high-profile morning shows were shown the door in the same week (Dean & Rog and The Bull ‘Morning Bullpen’).

There is now a growing fear that artificial intelligence (AI) will take over the radio airwaves slashing the need for even more staff, but AI is only the next step in the demise of what was once the king of media.

When I started my career at KTRH-AM back in the stone age, the station was owned by the Jones family. While they were focused on the bottom line, they were also interested in what was good for the community. Once, there was hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico and the newsroom needed petty cash to help cover the storm. The news director walked down the hall to the general manager who wrote a check for cash. No corporate approval was required.

They eventually did sell the stations in 1993 to Evergreen Media which later merged into Chancellor Media, which in turn was bought by Clear Channel Communications, the forerunner to today’s owner, iHeartMedia.

It was the Telecommunications Act of 1996 which eliminated the number of radio stations a company could own and opened the door for corporations to buy up commercial radio stations across the country which led to the two most dreaded words in broadcasting “shareholder value”. What was best for the community now came in a distant second to the bottom line.

Deregulation was not the only issue that changed radio. New technology (at the time) led to stations using voice tracking where radio stations created the impression of a live DJ when one isn’t actually present. A person would record audio clips and a computer would insert them between songs to create the illusion of a live broadcast.

Now, a DJ could “virtually” host shows on several stations around the country each day since it only took an hour or so to put together a four hour show saving a lot of money. I would not be surprised to see AI become the next virtual DJ and voice track thousands of shows thereby saving even more expense.

Another technology that led to the reduction in staff was automation. In the old days, you needed a producer to insert commercials, switch networks and be ready to interrupt with important information (weather emergencies, etc.). Now it’s all done by a computer by simply pressing a button. WKRP, the widely popular television show about a fictious station in Cincinnati actually foreshadowed the fate of radio in 1980 when, during a Dickens “Ba Humbug” style dream episode the station becomes fully automated with only a single salesman left to run things.

The proverbial genie is out of the bottle. South Korea cable channel MBN introduced the first artificial intelligence virtual news anchor back in 2020. And it’s not just broadcasting jobs, there are many other workforce sectors impacted by AI.

Customer service is becoming more automated with tools like chatbots and virtual assistants handling a broader range of inquiries and requests. Graphic designers are now in the crosshairs of the technology having to compete with AI-generated art which is available to everyone looking to create professional images without an ounce of artistic expertise.

Don’t look now, but advanced technology is slowly substituting jobs everywhere. Notice the word “substituting”, AI will eliminate some jobs, but it will also create new opportunities.

What does this mean for radio? As the saying goes, “stay tuned”.

Intelligent human behavior

Posted on September 10, 2024 by bvanrysdam

Artificial intelligence (AI) is taking the world by storm. From classrooms, healthcare offices, business boardrooms and social media (need help with writing that post?), AI is a tsunami that is not going away. It’s exhilarating, intriguing and to be honest, a little frightening.

In some ways I am reminded of reading when nuclear energy was being developed. It was exciting to think of a source of clean and cheap energy to replace coal-burning power plants, but then there’s that little thing about it also being made into a bomb that can level an entire city.

I don’t want to take anything away from AI and don’t want to compare it to a weapon of mass destruction, but I do have a fear that, more and more, we are taking away what it means to be human. Let’s start with the name Artificial Intelligence.

Merriam-Webster defines Artificial Intelligence as “the capability of computer systems or algorithms to imitate intelligent human behavior” (this definition takes into assumption that there is intelligent human behavior which may be just a bit of a stretch). Intelligence is the ability to learn, reason, solve problems and adapt to new situations, which is all very good, but then how is it used?

While the potential seems great, not everyone is enamored with AI.

“In a nutshell, the ease of creating digital art, whether using primitive tools like MS Paint or even artificial intelligence (AI) prompts, has cluttered the NFT art field with a lot of junk.”

—Zain Jaffer, Rolling Stone

“This indiscriminate use of AI for mass communication simultaneously dilutes the quality of pitches and strains the relationship between PR professionals and the journalists, who now face an overwhelming amount of low-quality outreach.”

—PRNews.Com

The takeaway for many is that more is not always better, especially when it is spit out by a computer.

AI will allow us to create content faster and cheaper, but is it better? The jury is still out.

Getting high on information

Posted on August 27, 2024 by bvanrysdam

A research team at the University of California, Irvine, with collaborators at Microsoft Research have used computer logging techniques that measure attention spans and heart rate monitors and wearable devices to determine stress.

They discovered that, since 2004, the average time a person can focus on one thing has dropped from around 2½ minutes to approximately 45 seconds. There are a lot of reasons behind this shortened attention span, but the main culprit appears to be the technology we rely on more and more.

In the old days (my time), news came in the form of a morning or evening newspaper along with television news during dinner time (morning radio was also a good source of information). Now information is instantaneous. News alerts pop-up constantly on our computers, phones and even watches. By the time television broadcasts the story (or God forbid newspapers), the news is already old.

Now factor in a new technology, Artificial Intelligence (AI). This new software is turning the world on its head, creating content at a record pace and adding to the ever-increasing noise we already hear. While exciting (and frightening), there are still many questions that need to be answered.

For example, what happens when you ask Chat GPI to write a news story on the presidential election and it takes content found on the internet from the Associated Press? Is that considered stealing, plagiarizing or simply product leakage (a term AP uses to define when someone uses their content without paying for it).

There are also very serious moral implications at play. Say the military uses AI to plan an attack on a terrorist cell hidden in several buildings in a city block. Also contained in that block is an orphanage. Does AI consider that as factor when deciding to go bombs away?

AI is also having an impact on the Public Relations world. PRNewsOnline.com reported…

Information overload is a real thing which begs the question, when is too much, too much?

I have always been a big proponent of less is more, keeping things simple and easier to understand. It can also lead to clarity when trying to process information and trying to determine what is important and what is simply fluff.

Who’s minding the store?

Posted on July 30, 2024 by bvanrysdam

The circus (Texas legislature) made its way back into Austin yesterday to hold a hearing on CenterPoint’s ineptness in its efforts to restore power following Hurricane Beryl.

While many of the senators showed anger and indignation during the day long testimony (State Senator Paul Bettencourt was awarded most outraged committee member of the hearing), it raised the question of where the buck stops.

Public Utility Commission Chairman Thomas Gleeson admitted that the PUC has not held utility companies accountable and that “I think we need a comprehensive look at how we fund utilities and how they prepare for storms” (you think said everyone?). It is shame that once again, we are being reactive rather than proactive.

The Public Utility Commission of Texas is in charge of regulating the state’s electric, telecommunication, and water and sewer utilities, implements respective legislation and provides customer assistance in resolving consumer complaints. The chairman and commissioners were all appointed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott.

Bettencourt said CenterPoint had “defrauded” rate payers who are now facing growing utility bills after state regulators allowed CenterPoint to recoup the cost plus a 6.5% profit for massive generators that sat on the sidelines during the storm.

Does anyone else see the irony here? State regulators set up the rules to allow CenterPoint to “defraud” its customers. If they (CenterPoint) are playing by the rules, shouldn’t we look at who makes the rules in the first place (Et Tu Brutus?)?

Bettencourt also accused CenterPoint of electing to spend money on the generators rather than clearing trees and vegetation that knocked out power lines, because CenterPoint can make a profit on the generators, but isn’t that the point of being a publicly traded company? The stock value as of today (7.30.2024) is down 5.53% over the past month. You don’t think there is another group people upset about that?

Capitalism promotes free market conditions, whereas socialism incorporates certain elements of centralized economic planning. Does the senator suggest we need to become socialists when it comes to powering Texas?

So how does this end? My guess is the buck will stop in somebody’s wallet courtesy of the consumer.

Here we go again

Posted on July 23, 2024 by bvanrysdam

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results” – Albert Einstein

The city of Houston took it on the proverbial chin once again when Hurricane Beryl struck the Texas gulf coast. Although only a Category 1 storm, Beryl’s impact left more than 2.2 million customers without electricity and damaged countless homes and automobiles. The death toll continues to grow with at least 23 people having died due to various storm related causes as of this post.

The finger pointing began even before recovery efforts started with CenterPoint being the main target of people’s anger. Politicians have been holding press conferences and updates demanding answers on why the energy giant was not ready to deal with what was supposed to be a minor storm.

“Power companies along the Gulf Coast must be prepared to deal with hurricanes, to state the obvious,” said Texas Governor Greg Abbott.

Now to be fair, building an electrical grid that can withstand hurricane force winds is not easy. Houston’s geography makes putting lines underground problematic and very expensive (guess who would pick the check on that, it ain’t the power company ). Heavy vegetation (aka The Livable Forest) in many communities also make restoring power a nightmare for power companies. People love living among the tall trees until they fall on a power line, or worse a roof.

It is also a big task to coordinate line men and women to come from other states to help repair the grid. Each grid is different and requires workers are trained so they can safely make the necessary repairs. Plus you have to provide housing, food and other resources all to a moving target. Remember weather forecasters predicted the storm was first supposed to hit Brownsville, then they said Corpus Christi and then maybe Matagorda Bay. Again, it’s not easy.

But, to also be fair, one of the key components of a crisis is effective communication and that’s where CenterPoint clearly fell flat. Non-working outage maps, lack of emails/texts to customers and inconsistent messaging with the media threw fuel on a fire that was already raging. And why on earth would media tell its audience to go to the CenterPoint Outage map knowing it did not work.

It also did not help their messaging when the CEO was interviewed next to a thermostat showing the room at a comfortable 70 degrees. Where were the public relations people? They should have had him on-site where repairs were taking place. That photo would have helped demonstrate his commitment to working toward restoring power.

Still the politicians continue their media circus, grandstanding and acting surprised, very much like Captain Louis Renault in Casablanca who is shocked that gambling is taking place at Rick’s Café while collecting his winnings. One has to wonder how much the politicians collect from their winnings, I mean campaign contributions from CenterPoint.