Choking on Indigestible Reams of Information
- Fred
- 1 day ago
- 4 min read
Those on the Left are screaming "RELEASE THE EPSTIEN FILES! IT'S TIME TO NAIL THAT BASTARD DONALD TRUMP!!!"
Those on the Right are screaming "RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES! IT'S TIME TO NAIL THE PARTY OF PEDOPHILES!!!
As a libertarian, I support the release of all of the government files on Jeffrey Epstein, damage to EITHER party be damned.
But then I ran across this gem: ABC News reported: Most of Epstein Files given to Congress are Already Public Record.
What games are we playing now?
Have you ever read Herman Melville's Moby Dick? The original American edition was 635 pages and, according to AI, it would take the average reader about 14.5 hours to read the book. Do you know anyone who started to read Moby Dick and actually finished reading the classic without the aid of Cliff Notes?
Last month, the Department of Justice sent just over 33,000 pages of the Epstein Files to Congress, out of a possible 100,000 or so pages in their possession.
Just as a reference point, the U.S. government collected more than 6 million pages of notes and investigative work in reference to the Kennedy Assassination. Everyone just assumes that hidden in the boxes and boxes, upon pallets and pallets, of paper, the answer as to who is the "real" killer of JFK must certainly lie within. When, in reality, the government simply collected reams of redundancy, speculation, and partial answers. About 98% of those files have already been released for public consumption.
What the general public is looking for is a quick answer, a smoking gun document, so to speak. Those clear answers rarely exist in a brackish quagmire of data. When people pound their fists on the table, demanding answers, they just want the one page that summarizes everything. That page rarely, if ever, exists.
If I had the Epstein Files in my hand, and gave them to you right now, all 100,000 pages, it would take you 3 years to digest them at a pace of 100 pages a day. If your day job was reading the Epstein Files, you could probably whittle the time down to 6 months or so.
By the year 2020, the same names kept coming up over and over again in relation to the Epstein Case:
Donald Trump
Bill Clinton
Bill Gates
John Glenn
Prince Andrew
In the Epstein Files, there, again, wasn't a smoking gun per se, a little black book, but there were 1,571 names in an address book. An intrepid reporter at Mother Jones called all 1,571 names on the list in the year 2020: In the article I Called Everyone in Jeffrey Epstein's Black Book, this was the money quote from Leland Nally's very well researched piece, "one thing was abundantly clear, Epstein’s black book does not offer a portrait of a guy with many friends. The book is the product of a systematized effort to collect human beings....There were plenty of clues that Epstein was a poseur."
In the year 2023, we wrote about Jeffrey Epstein and Noam Chomsky.
In the year 2024, we wrote about Jeffrey Epstein and Stephen Hawking.
In the year 2025, we wrote about Jeffrey Epstein and Alan Dershowitz.
Where you see a conspiracy, I see a colossal wall of ineptitude.
I mean, what helps you sleep better at night? The government is run by a few well placed rich and intelligent individuals that know all the secrets of our country, but won't share them. Or the government is run by a collection of idiots, no smarter than you or me, that are afraid because they legit don't know what's in the files and are worried about information that could potentially damage their political parties or their friends,
How many pages of the files do you think Donald Trump read?
Quietly, the editor at cleveland.com admitting that the website is using AI to write nearly every article.
His justification? Reporting the news is hard with limited staff, so his team uses AI like a math student uses a calculator.
Uh... apples and oranges.
Their editor, Chris Quinn, is using AI to summarize long and voluminous information in the name of maximizing content under the guise that he only has limited resources, but where are the lines? If they're busy, can they plug a 10 page document into the AI program, get a 3 paragraph summary, then publish it? To me, 10 pages really isn't that much to read if you're a reporter. What is too much work? What is too much content to digest?
Cleveland.com mostly uses AI for proofreading, editing, and content generation, but there have been proofreading and editing programs available for a generation.
Using Quinn's own logic, let's say that one of his intrepid reporters at his website took the 33,000 pages of the already available Epstein Files and fed them into the AI Program. What if it spits this out:
DONALD TRUMP INNOCENT!
BILL CLINTON GUILTY!
ALAN DERSHOWITZ: SECRET RINGLEADER!
Is that news? Do you publish that? I am telling you, Dershowitz will sue Advance Local into non-existence.
Inversely, what if AI generates this:
BILL CLINTON INNOCENT!
ALAN DERSHOWITZ INNOCENT!
DONALD TRUMP: SECRET RINGLEADER!
Does cleveland.com make the commitment to publish whatever results AI generates? Or does it only release content where it likes the results?
What if AI says there wasn't a lone gunman in the Kennedy Assassination? AI posits it was a KGB sponsored operation, not unlike the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II.
Side Note: Whatever Chris Quinn's angle is, it's usually wrong.
Just to send you off on a down note.
According to the website Ranker: Books You'll Never Finish Reading
# 2 Moby Dick.
# 1 The Bible.
How many Christians do you think never read the Bible from start to finish? Why read the Bible when you can just talk to AI Jesus?
So I asked AI Jesus a very personal question, a question that's been bothering me lately. Not a flippant question, like 'who won the 1954 World Series?' Something serious.
Jesus' response?
If you’re a true news junkie, Whatfinger News is your fix—more news, more sources, and zero Big Tech censorship.