The Future is Here, and I’m Shocked Op-Ed

By Jonathan Micocci

A question was posed to the candidates at a recent candidate forum: Are you in favor of term limits? Seems a good question. One candidate was in favor and the rest were not.

Personally, I see a good case for both sides. Something like this:

Arguments for term limits in elections include the idea that it can help prevent political dynasties and career politicians, promote fresh ideas and new leadership, increase competition and diversity in government, and limit the potential for corruption or abuse of power.

Arguments against term limits in elections include the idea that it can limit the experience and expertise of elected officials, prevent leaders from staying in office, and limit the ability of voters to choose the candidate they believe will best represent them.

All good points, I think. But they are not my points or even my words. They are the product of artificial intelligence, generated after I put the question to ChatGPT, the open source AI tool that the general public can access for free (for now, anyway).

We’re probably overdue for a true “gee whiz” tech bump and this may actually be that next big thing. Certainly, it’s a game changer for anyone who needs smart-sounding words right now. Imagine journalists on deadline, Realtors reaching for a peppy listing description, or students with a paper due who didn’t... you know...study. It’s like those early household appliances that would “free you from drudgery and give you time for the fun things in life!”

But this isn’t the encyclopedia, Wikipedia, or even Google. We’re not looking up facts so much as... thoughts. The drudgery we will be freed from appears to that of “thinking.” What I could find in one quick test looks like a machine processing information and arriving at conclusions. It’s a simple step for the machine to act on those conclusions and then, really, what are we needed for?

...it will be Max Profit who will make the real decisions and the rest of us will adapt...

ChatGPT isn’t quite all that in current form. I actually deleted a sentence from the response that didn’t fit, though it is otherwise word for word. And notice that it used the singular “it” to reference “term limits.” They are a singular concept, after all. How many of us would have considered that?

I imagine the phone is ringing nonstop down at the unemployed philosophers union hall, and we’ll be having a robust discussion about the rightful role of AI in the years ahead, etc., but if the past is predictive, it will be Max Profit making the real decisions and the rest of us will adapt as well as we can.

Just as engineers know that the most flawed part of an aircraft is likely to be the pilot, will it soon become obvious that the truly flawed part of the human race is the human? And now there’s a solution for that.

Jonathan Micocci is a Gulfport resident, Realtor, and occasional contributor to The Gabber.

RV There Yet?

Gulfport Council Tables RV Ordinance

By Monroe Roark

After an hour of discussion about Gulfport’s RV ordinance, Gulfport City Council decided to come back in two weeks and talk about it again.

Council tabled the first reading of the amended ordinance, which would eliminate the current setback requirements that make it difficult or impossible for many RV owners to store their vehicles in their own yards. As proposed, the new rules would allow for one licensed and operable RV on a residential property in any part of a yard as long as it does not block the right-of-way.

Councilmember Paul Ray (Ward III), who initially asked for consideration on these changes, continued to stress that the issue for him was one of property rights and suggested that the ordinance passed a decade ago was a thinly veiled attempt to outlaw such vehicles throughout the city.

“We need to de-criminalize RVs,” said Ray. “That’s basically what we did. We criminalized them. ... I just think it’s unequitable, and I think it’s unfair.”

Councilmember Michael Fridovich (Ward IV) said he received more emails and phone calls on this issue than any other in his 10 years on the council and noted that it has become “divisive.” He suggested putting it on a voter referendum this fall.

“If we say yes, we’re going to tick off half the city. If we say no, we’re going to tick off the other half of the city,” said Fridovich. “I think we should let the residents of Gulfport decide what they want to do. We do not need a special election to do so. That’s my suggestion – that we leave it up to the public.”

This was a different take from a similarly divisive issue just three months ago, when council voted to vacate property on Beach Drive and sign it over to three residential property owners. Ray called for a refer- endum on that issue, but Fridovich countered, “Sometimes we have to make hard decisions. That is why we are elected.”

Council reached consensus on one proposed change to the ordinance, suggested by Councilmember April Thanos (Ward I), requiring every RV owner to receive a registration sticker from the city that can be displayed on the vehicle so that code enforcement officers and others who drive by can see that the vehicle is on its owner’s property. Thanos had no problem with eliminating all of the setbacks or allowing parking in the front yard, although she suggested that property owners be allowed only one vehicle – boat or RV.

Mayor Sam Henderson said several times that the issue was RVs alone and he would not favor of any changes related to boats. He also warned the rest of council and the public that not everyone would be happy with what is parked next door to them should the ordinance get changed.

“We can’t legislate aesthetics,” he said. “I appreciate that when everyone in here says they take good care

RV continued on page 7

Sponsored Content by the University of South Florida PACT