richardmurray

@Troy i concur that unity of a purpose is a foundation for any organization that wants cohesive members. I know it isn't as straightforward as you said it, but when I think of unity it is a collectiveness about a thing while organization to me is a thing structured about a thing. they are not the same for me, I think both have equal value. Collectiveness + Structure is ideal and rare in most settings. To google, being able to print back issues. When Ebony was sold to clearview one wonders what they signed or agreed to. Firms that buy other firms in financial distress have a sell mentality. Clearview wants to break up and sell what it can. It wasn't and isn't looking to grow anything. They are just a fancier shark from the 1970s and 1980s. http://www.clearview-group.com/services.html So more than likely the time ebony was owned by clear view have google the opportunity to show the backlog, let alone anything that happened while Johnson, the original owner was dead and Ebony was owned by his relatives, I assume. yeah, bridgeman is one of many blacks in the entertainment field who found themselves at the growing fast food franchise industry at the right time. Bill Cosby was a big bottler. A number of black entertainers invested in the fast food industry in the 70s/80s which was a great time, during the 1980s in particular. Fast food places would explode all over the place and people like bridgeman who actually had money and was black could afford to start one or two and go from there. Now he is in the Black owned investment firm market, which is relatively hot right now. To the web being siloed, that is the way it should be , shouldn't it? Most human beings are not online. But as the populace grows online, it will make outreach harder, which makes sense to me. Let alone that the social firms online are many and even though some may be deemed small they tend to have millions .

MY COMMENT I read the article. Franlin leonard said:"when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression" but he chose the wrong phrase. He talks about feelings but the issue is desires. The equation is simple. Fiscal capitalism in the USA doesn't work on merit or knowledge or erudition or wisdom. It works on inheritance + opportunity. Whites are accustomed to a greater inheritance + opportunity than any other. That is why their forebears killed the native american for this land and enslaved blacks, no matter where we came from, to till it. This was to provide their future generations greater inheritance + opportunity. But whites comprehend what equality is, beyond what it feels like. Equality financially is a lessening of inheritance + opportunity for those getting the most. It is a simple financial loss. Black people do ourselves a disservice making equality an issue of feelings, and not a financial loss, for whites. Black people want equality not to feel free, freedom doesn't come from equality. Black people want equality to gain more inheritance + opportunity. Another issue is the word slavery is never mentioned in these sort of articles. I quote the article:"Hierarchy-flattening programs like affirmative action wouldn't be necessary if Black Americans received equal opportunities. " Black Americans were enslaved to white americans, that heritage is the basis to inequality. The USA didn't start with Native Americans+Blacks+Whites free and equal and Blacks+Native Americans had their equality taken away by whites. The USA was born with Blacks+ NAtive Americans enslaved/murdered/oppressed. It wasn't like when the war between the states ended blacks+whites were equal. The author makes it seem like the modern era from 1968 to now matters. But it doesn't. The inequality black people refer to is American, is historic, is a heritage. I think the inability of Black people to mention fiscal capital context when it comes to the phenotypical racial relationships as well as the inability or lack of desire to connect slavery to the modern situation are dysfunctions.

Queen plushie from MysticSkillz

To Order personal message here https://www.deviantart.com/mystic-skillz or place order her https://www.twitch.tv/mysticskillzms ANimations + games from Mystic SKillz https://aalbc.com/tc/search/?&q=mystic skillz&type=blog_entry&quick=1&nodes=62&search_and_or=or&sortby=relevancy

Alex Roca Campillo Cerebral palsy marathon completer https://rmfantasysetpieces1.tumblr.com/post/713459327312216064/magnificent-barcelonas-alex-roca-campillo-made

Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence A Rule by the Copyright Office, Library of Congress on 03/16/2023 HTML https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05321/copyright-registration-guidance-works-containing-material-generated-by-artificial-intelligence PDF https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-03-16/pdf/2023-05321.pdf Printed version: PDF Publication Date: 03/16/2023 Agencies: Copyright Office Dates: This statement of policy is effective March 16, 2023. Effective Date: 03/16/2023 Document Type: Rule Document Citation: 88 FR 16190 Page: 16190-16194 (5 pages) CFR: 37 CFR 202 Document Number: 2023-05321 AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress. ACTION: Statement of policy. SUMMARY: The Copyright Office issues this statement of policy to clarify its practices for examining and registering works that contain material generated by the use of artificial intelligence technology. DATES: This statement of policy is effective March 16, 2023. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rhea Efthimiadis, Assistant to the General Counsel, by email at meft@copyright.gov or telephone at 202-707-8350. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Copyright Office (the “Office”) is the Federal agency tasked with administering the copyright registration system, as well as advising Congress, other agencies, and the Federal judiciary on copyright and related matters.[1] Because the Office has overseen copyright registration since its origins in 1870, it has developed substantial experience and expertise regarding “the distinction between copyrightable and noncopyrightable works.” [2] The Office is empowered by the Copyright Act to establish the application used by applicants seeking registration of their copyrighted works.[3] While the Act identifies certain minimum requirements, the Register may determine that additional information is necessary for the Office to evaluate the “existence, ownership, or duration of the copyright.” [4] Because the Office receives roughly half a million applications for registration each year, it sees new trends in registration activity that may require modifying or expanding the information required to be disclosed on an application. One such recent development is the use of sophisticated artificial intelligence (“AI”) technologies capable of producing expressive material.[5] These technologies “train” on vast quantities of preexisting human-authored works and use inferences from that training to generate new content. Some systems operate in response to a user's textual instruction, called a “prompt.” [6] The resulting output may be textual, visual, or audio, and is determined by the AI based on its design and the material it has been trained on. These technologies, often described as “generative AI,” raise questions about whether the material they produce is protected by copyright, whether works consisting of both human-authored and AI-generated material may be registered, and what information should be provided to the Office by applicants seeking to register them. These are no longer hypothetical questions, as the Office is already receiving and examining applications for registration that claim copyright in AI-generated material. For example, in 2018 the Office received an application for a visual work that the applicant described as “autonomously created by a computer algorithm running on a machine.” [7] The application was denied because, based on the applicant's representations in the application, the examiner found that the work contained no human authorship. After a series of administrative appeals, the Office's Review Board issued a final determination affirming that the work could not be registered because it was made “without any creative contribution from a human actor.” [8] More recently, the Office reviewed a registration for a work containing human-authored elements combined with AI-generated images. In February 2023, the Office concluded that a graphic novel [9] comprised of human-authored text combined with images generated by the AI service Midjourney constituted a copyrightable work, but that the individual images themselves could not be protected by copyright.[10] The Office has received other applications that have named AI technology as the author or co-author of the work or have included statements in the “Author Created” or “Note to Copyright Office” sections of the application indicating that the work was produced by or with the assistance of AI. Other applicants have not disclosed the inclusion of AI-generated material but have mentioned the names of AI technologies in the title of the work or the “acknowledgments” section of the deposit. Based on these developments, the Office concludes that public guidance is needed on the registration of works containing AI-generated content. This statement of policy describes how the Office applies copyright law's human authorship requirement to applications to register such works and provides guidance to applicants. The Office recognizes that AI-generated works implicate other copyright issues not addressed in this statement. It has launched an agency-wide initiative to delve into a wide range of these issues. Among other things, the Office intends to publish a notice of inquiry later this year seeking public input on additional legal and policy topics, including how the law should apply to the use of copyrighted works in AI training and the resulting treatment of outputs. II. The Human Authorship Requirement In the Office's view, it is well-established that copyright can protect only material that is the product of human creativity. Most fundamentally, the term “author,” which is used in both the Constitution and the Copyright Act, excludes non-humans. The Office's registration policies and regulations reflect statutory and judicial guidance on this issue. In its leading case on authorship, the Supreme Court used language excluding non-humans in interpreting Congress's constitutional power to provide “authors” the exclusive right to their “writings.” [11] In Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, a defendant accused of making unauthorized copies of a photograph argued that the expansion of copyright protection to photographs by Congress was unconstitutional because “a photograph is not a writing nor the production of an author” but is instead created by a camera.[12] The Court disagreed, holding that there was “no doubt” the Constitution's Copyright Clause permitted photographs to be subject to copyright, “so far as they are representatives of original intellectual conceptions of the author.” [13] The Court defined an “author” as “he to whom anything owes its origin; originator; maker; one who completes a work of science or literature.” [14] It repeatedly referred to such “authors” as human, describing authors as a class of “persons” [15] and a copyright as “the exclusive right of a man to the production of his own genius or intellect.” [16] Federal appellate courts have reached a similar conclusion when interpreting the text of the Copyright Act, which provides copyright protection only for “works of authorship.” [17] The Ninth Circuit has held that a book containing words “authored by non-human spiritual beings” can only qualify for copyright protection if there is “human selection and arrangement of the revelations.” [18] In another case, it held that a monkey cannot register a copyright in photos it captures with a camera because the Copyright Act refers to an author's “children,” “widow,” “grandchildren,” and “widower,”—terms that “all imply humanity and necessarily exclude animals.” [19] Relying on these cases among others, the Office's existing registration guidance has long required that works be the product of human authorship. In the 1973 edition of the Office's Compendium of Copyright Office Practices, the Office warned that it would not register materials that did not “owe their origin to a human agent.” [20] The second edition of the Compendium, published in 1984, explained that the “term `authorship' implies that, for a work to be copyrightable, it must owe its origin to a human being.” [21] And in the current edition of the Compendium, the Office states that “to qualify as a work of `authorship' a work must be created by a human being” and that it “will not register works produced by a machine or mere mechanical process that operates randomly or automatically without any creative input or intervention from a human author.” [22] III. The Office's Application of the Human Authorship Requirement As the agency overseeing the copyright registration system, the Office has extensive experience in evaluating works submitted for registration that contain human authorship combined with uncopyrightable material, including material generated by or with the assistance of technology. It begins by asking “whether the `work' is basically one of human authorship, with the computer [or other device] merely being an assisting instrument, or whether the traditional elements of authorship in the work (literary, artistic, or musical expression or elements of selection, arrangement, etc.) were actually conceived and executed not by man but by a machine.” [23] In the case of works containing AI-generated material, the Office will consider whether the AI contributions are the result of “mechanical reproduction” or instead of an author's “own original mental conception, to which [the author] gave visible form.” [24] The answer will depend on the circumstances, particularly how the AI tool operates and how it was used to create the final work.[25] This is necessarily a case-by-case inquiry. If a work's traditional elements of authorship were produced by a machine, the work lacks human authorship and the Office will not register it.[26] For example, when an AI technology receives solely a prompt [27] from a human and produces complex written, visual, or musical works in response, the “traditional elements of authorship” are determined and executed by the technology—not the human user. Based on the Office's understanding of the generative AI technologies currently available, users do not exercise ultimate creative control over how such systems interpret prompts and generate material. Instead, these prompts function more like instructions to a commissioned artist—they identify what the prompter wishes to have depicted, but the machine determines how those instructions are implemented in its output.[28] For example, if a user instructs a text-generating technology to “write a poem about copyright law in the style of William Shakespeare,” she can expect the system to generate text that is recognizable as a poem, mentions copyright, and resembles Shakespeare's style.[29] But the technology will decide the rhyming pattern, the words in each line, and the structure of the text.[30] When an AI technology determines the expressive elements of its output, the generated material is not the product of human authorship.[31] As a result, that material is not protected by copyright and must be disclaimed in a registration application.[32] In other cases, however, a work containing AI-generated material will also contain sufficient human authorship to support a copyright claim. For example, a human may select or arrange AI-generated material in a sufficiently creative way that “the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.” [33] Or an artist may modify material originally generated by AI technology to such a degree that the modifications meet the standard for copyright protection.[34] In these cases, copyright will only protect the human-authored aspects of the work, which are “independent of” and do “not affect” the copyright status of the AI-generated material itself.[35] This policy does not mean that technological tools cannot be part of the creative process. Authors have long used such tools to create their works or to recast, transform, or adapt their expressive authorship. For example, a visual artist who uses Adobe Photoshop to edit an image remains the author of the modified image,[36] and a musical artist may use effects such as guitar pedals when creating a sound recording. In each case, what matters is the extent to which the human had creative control over the work's expression and “actually formed” the traditional elements of authorship.[37] IV. Guidance for Copyright Applicants Consistent with the Office's policies described above, applicants have a duty to disclose the inclusion of AI-generated content in a work submitted for registration and to provide a brief explanation of the human author's contributions to the work. As contemplated by the Copyright Act, such disclosures are “information regarded by the Register of Copyrights as bearing upon the preparation or identification of the work or the existence, ownership, or duration of the copyright.” [38] A. How To Submit Applications for Works Containing AI-Generated Material Individuals who use AI technology in creating a work may claim copyright protection for their own contributions to that work. They must use the Standard Application,[39] and in it identify the author(s) and provide a brief statement in the “Author Created” field that describes the authorship that was contributed by a human. For example, an applicant who incorporates AI-generated text into a larger textual work should claim the portions of the textual work that is human-authored. And an applicant who creatively arranges the human and non-human content within a work should fill out the “Author Created” field to claim: “Selection, coordination, and arrangement of [describe human-authored content] created by the author and [describe AI content] generated by artificial intelligence.” Applicants should not list an AI technology or the company that provided it as an author or co-author simply because they used it when creating their work. AI-generated content that is more than de minimis should be explicitly excluded from the application.[40] This may be done in the “Limitation of the Claim” section in the “Other” field, under the “Material Excluded” heading. Applicants should provide a brief description of the AI-generated content, such as by entering “[description of content] generated by artificial intelligence.” Applicants may also provide additional information in the “Note to CO” field in the Standard Application. Applicants who are unsure of how to fill out the application may simply provide a general statement that a work contains AI-generated material. The Office will contact the applicant when the claim is reviewed and determine how to proceed. In some cases, the use of an AI tool will not raise questions about human authorship, and the Office will explain that nothing needs to be disclaimed on the application. B. How To Correct a Previously Submitted or Pending Application Applicants who have already submitted applications for works containing AI-generated material should check that the information provided to the Office adequately disclosed that material. If not, they should take steps to correct their information so that the registration remains effective. For applications currently pending before the Office, applicants should contact the Copyright Office's Public Information Office and report that their application omitted the fact that the work contained AI-generated material.[41] Staff will add a note to the record, which the examiner will see when reviewing the claim. If necessary, the examiner then will correspond with the applicant to obtain additional information about the nature of the human authorship included in the work. For applications that have already been processed and resulted in a registration, the applicant should correct the public record by submitting a supplementary registration. A supplementary registration is a special type of registration that may be used “to correct an error in a copyright registration or to amplify the information given in a registration.” [42] In the supplementary registration, the applicant should describe the original material that the human author contributed in the “Author Created” field, disclaim the AI-generated material in the “Material Excluded/Other” field, and complete the “New Material Added/Other” field. As long as there is sufficient human authorship, the Office will issue a new supplementary registration certificate with a disclaimer addressing the AI-generated material.[43] Applicants who fail to update the public record after obtaining a registration for material generated by AI risk losing the benefits of the registration. If the Office becomes aware that information essential to its evaluation of registrability “has been omitted entirely from the application or is questionable,” it may take steps to cancel the registration.[44] Separately, a court may disregard a registration in an infringement action pursuant to section 411(b) of the Copyright Act if it concludes that the applicant knowingly provided the Office with inaccurate information, and the accurate information would have resulted in the refusal of the registration.[45] V. Conclusion This policy statement sets out the Office's approach to registration of works containing material generated by AI technology. The Office continues to monitor new factual and legal developments involving AI and copyright and may issue additional guidance in the future related to registration or the other copyright issues implicated by this technology. * * * * * Dated: March 10, 2023.

some small things are absolutely brilliant if you don't know prior entry

https://www.deviantart.com/yayacosplay/art/Lady-Dimitrescu-887386144

@Chevdove well, based on his policies he is no different than any other president. Schrumpf merely continued barack obama's immigration policy. Obama was the one who started separating the illegal immigrant children, not schrumpf. Schrumpf merely continued it. Schrumpf focused on china as an opponent and Biden is continuing it. The wild financial system has been given free reign since Reagan, all presidents since reagan have capitulated to the banks and financial sectors, all of them. Schrumpf differs from all the other reagan era presidents by one thing alone, his advertisements. From Reagan to Biden all the presidents outside SChrumpf don't advertise negativities. Reagan undercut public schools, which public schools never recovered from, but he never said, taxpayers money should go to taxpayers schools. Bush jr. went into iraq to continue the war machine to get control of oil but never said, the usa needs to reclaim the global oil supply to make cost of living like it was before 1970s for the usa empire. Clinton damaged the labor system with welfare to work and mismanaged the internet allowing the private sector to dictate its elemental structure. But he never said, I am unwilling to curtail the business plan of the private sector for the poor and I am willing to accept this new media outlet be a wild west to the detriment of all who interact with it. Bush jr. made two illegal wars. but he never said, the usa has to have a greater militaristic presence in the arab world whether they want it or not. Obama broke the first rule of fiscal capitalism and insulted every fiscal poor person in the usa giving a black check to the banks and automotive firms and others. but he never said, I don't have the courage or desire to destroy the generational wealth from the time of george washington in the white community and force everyone in the usa and the global economy to start on truly equal footing. Biden threatened the oil industry while wanting the oil industry to help him while financing a war with a country that supported the usa illegal invading another. but is unwilling to say, the usa empire has to spread its wings to show rivals what their place is and the military will force all including china to the usa's will if need be. Schrumpf said, russia is a friend, cause russia is, a fellow empire that spent from the end of the second phase of the world war to the fall of the soviet union joining the usa in using every other country as a proxy battlefield. Saving the ussr/russia and the usa from any of the war zones that plagued south america/eastern europe/africa/asia and china is an enemy, china is the first non white european country to achieve the military ability to be respected by the usa/the financial ability to be respected by the usa since the fall of japan. and china unlike the japanese has a much large anti european culture in their modern form. When schrumpf didn't go to the arizona senators funeral that was the correct thing to do, you don't go to the funeral of somebody you can't stand. Russia is willing to join the usa against china. Biden wants russia to join against china too but he also wants russia to allow western europe to dominate it. Cause with russia's help the usa can control the oil conveniently until the USA can control the next major energy technology. Schrumpf advertises his views and ways clearly. he doesn't trick, he uses blunt power and the whites/blacks/native americans/women who have money in the usa are used to forked tongue behavior. The Black church was a large supporter of the war on drugs which hurt the larger black community but couldn't admit their role and still don't admit it now. while many fiscally wealthy black people are part of black church communities designed to merely collate their wealth. Women say they want empowerment but whenever women have a chance to become the dominant owners of an industry, like a woman sport, they don't cause women are afraid to risk their money or believe in themselves. Whites in NYC talk about equality and speak ill of whites who are deemed "conservative" but the white liberals and goodie goods support policies that deny any opportunity in the black community whatsoever. Bill clinton and the white plus black democratic party officials in nyc were huge supporters of the harlem empowerment zone that didn't empower one black owned business in harlem, and led to the death of many of them. Schrumpf does what all his peers do but he doesn't talk like them. He doesn't tell black people he loves them or play the saxophone. He doesn't tell women he wants them to have a seat at the table or be his equal, and pays for women to service him. He doesn't tell immigrants he wants them for anything but cheap labor and he doesn't want to help their kids, knowing that is why many came to the usa. Is he positive? no. he is very negative. but he did nothing others didn't do or are doing. but he doesn't speak like his presidential peers and that is his true problem in the larger usa. The black senator from brooklyn hasn't helped the black community in brooklyn. Eric Adams is not raising the black community. Eric adams is helping a select set of blacks mostly related to black cop families, another 1%, financial black elite in nyc. De Sanctiss don't care about white farmers. He isn't trying to improve the white community, but simply ingratiate himself and his white elected elite stay financially safe, no matter the cost. But none of them say it. SChrumpf is willing to say things that show a level of unconcern to keeping up the lies that are at the foundation of the usa. This is why he has so many enemies on both sides. Schrumpf isn't a hero or worker or advocate for the common people, but his way of communicating goes against what the majority of the have's in government or the private sector like. @ProfD yes , those other presidents are not a threat to the system, everything they do is within a confine. They speak the way they are allowed to speak, they do the things they are allowed to do. Schrumpf loves going off script and that is something the others dont do. so nothing to talk about. The People in the usa need to do ask what will happen to themselves:) I Ask again, what I always ask in these post eventually. what do you want tomorrow for the group to be? I usually mean black people only, here or there. But in the usa context, what do you want tomorrow to be for the populace in the u.s.a.? That is the question, but that question is hard. It is easy to be about yourself alone. Look out for number one, I got mine get yours. I do for me. The problem is, the usa has a populace of over three hundred million people , with tons of hatreds/dislikes/financial inequalities /various criminal acts between them. Any group of a certain size needs management, needs to be governed. A group of individuals is not enough, not satisfactory. Schrumpf realizes that no one in power: the elected officials, the banks, the global firms, the fiscal elite, the military are interested in anything but an individual mantra. The only problem is, people will cluster until they either make it a public policy or start working towards organizing the group. But the reagan/bush sr or jr/clinton/obama/biden centrist individualism is just not enough for the group. Yes, a minority of whites/blacks/womens/men/christian/muslims/atheitst/latinos/anglos/sinos/native americans are thriving and will thrive, but the majority in every group needs more, needs more. Schrumpf doesn't offer it but he knows said majorities when they get angry enough, will want someone who will tell them how they truly feel , which is a truth his peers are unwilling or unable to do

@ProfD if it can happen it will I don't know how this will end, it is possible Schrumpf ends up behind bars, it is possible he will not. I don't think any outcome is certain. But for me, this is a witchhunt.

her website https://katetilton.com/

no @Delano because I didn't answer your original question. Whether schrumpf goes to jail or not, to me was less important than the question of the usa population itself. I admit being in the black community has taught me the importance of comprehending the internal multiracial condition of any community. I wish more black people would comprehend the internal multiracial reality of the black community in the usa or under any government. All black people are black, but we do not share the same ideas about tomorrow and that matters. And it extends to all communities. The over 300 million people in the usa don't have a consensus on tomorrow. and that is the real problem. The government of the usa isn't flexible enough to handle it so you get this chaos. I have said publicly many times, i don't like schrumpt, for many things before his presidential era. But, even though I dislike him, the problems surrounding him have little to do with him and more to do with the truth of the usa which sadly, many people in the usa want to ignore or not see or hope to override through a mix of media plus education programs plus peer pressure. To the case. The first legal fact is , this entire case hinges on the fact that donal trump isn't a new york city resident. if donald trump was listed as a nyc resident the statue of limitations on this case would not allow it, to go forward. which means this case is a witch hunt. The reality is, the district attorney , alvin bragg, could had given this case a pass. He chose not to... but , while I am no lawyer nor do I like schrumpf, i find the basis of this case, a case that would be thrown out if schrumpf lived in nyc, which concerns nothing but a payment to pornstar... people in nyc media are trying to spin this as good law but come on:) this is clearlya witch hunt. and why does that matter? witch hunts only make more witch hunts. cause the point of any witch hunt is to attack someone deemed undesireable by a group that has the power to take advantage, it is never for the betterment of any community. So will he go to jail, I still don't care, and it may happen, but the legal underpinnings, as a non lawyer, I see as soft.

the answers to questions https://entertainment.tumblr.com/tagged/dungeons and dragons https://www.tumblr.com/entertainment/713244388344659969/gather-your-dungeons-and-your-dragons-its-time

Richard Murray Chesspiece and amethyst Vase by richardmurray3d on Sketchfab The purple chesspiece is fine but I don't like the colors in the vase. Sketchfab displays it differently, so I need to be careful about lighting and colors. My second chessboard

Webinar with south side home movie project started by Jaqueline Stewart, my review of elements while experiencing. Positive Black life in home movies. Women and History in home movies. A 1940s party Community tagging using an interaction between Jeanette Forman side Justin Williams Oldest Black Home Movie in their collection https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2300&type=status

@Chevdove yeah, the behind your birth time machine. The problem with people in history like Tituba is all that is known is irrelevant to knowing who she is. this is why I emphasize to all black people, leave a diary. Not for sale, not for making money, for making a record of you by you. This is not about getting an a or making a thesis for review to earn a piece of paper from a school, this is about comprehending that knowing who someone is , does not derive from the paper trail. Their travel log doesn't display who they are. census does not display who they are. a diary displays who you are. well, yes, in some ways I find a lot of value in her testimony, not truth in what it says but in truth in what it derives. here is an enslaved woman, unhappy/angry/bitter and she must have realized this is her chance to cause havoc. I find comfort in the truth of her actions.

@Pioneer1 at least from this author's words, tituba didn't start it, not in the least. it was started in a white pastors home. but what the author admits is tituba's claims were the most flamboyant or extravagant. Tituba didn't start it but tituba stoked it better than any other. And it wasn't anger at the white family, it was anger at the white community. One of the tragedies of modernity is black people living today don't seem to comprehend how enslaved black people hated whites. Maybe it is just hard for most modern black folks to accept such hate in the hearts our forebears when we have grandmothers talking about don't hate.

@SpeakHerTruth I will defend the black community in the usa and say, black people , all age groups, living today have to realize that in the black community in the usa we have many battles of heritage, what we carry, that had very negative legacies in the cultures, what we grow, afterward. When the war between the states ended , while most black people could be considered christian, we were not church people. Remember, black churches were common after the war between the states. Why does that matter? the creation and administration and culture of black churches was a battle in the black community that we don't speak of enough. As always in the usa in the black community , no consensus existed really, but who won the war? Black churches, financed by whites mostly, who felt the illiterate black people , who were illiterate through slavery not their own means, were a lesser peoples who needed sheparding by the black people more fortunate to have been allowed to learn. We had the black college movement, again mostly founded by white churches, to get the black one percent, the black financial aristocracy to be christian/culturally attuned to the usa- meaning no anti white<get the hate out your heart> - no anti usa<even though you were enslaved and forced to immigrate it makes no difference, which is a clear matter of opinion, not fact>.And in black colleges became a minority in the black community who used their common education as a status symbol to the majority of black people who could read or write, but were not knowledgeable and often used various accents or patuas like geechee, which black people don't like to admit was looked down on by the black one percent. Then you had the NAACP , funded by white jews, who through WEB DUbois believed in the talented tenth, which is another minority in the black community. And this one doesn't like black music/ ala no negro spirituals or jazz, was usually redbone, thus looked down on black people of browner hues in skin, and of course, thought unknowledgeable blacks were lazy. My point, the black community in the usa since the end of the war between the states had a black financial elite, I call the black one percent, who while a minority represented the people in leadership roles in the black community. and that minority in the black community had public negative biases towards black people based on how they talked, what they knew, how they saw the world. and the legacy of that internal bias which started at the end of the war between the states has only grown or mutated over the one hundred and fifty plus years to modernity, the now. Remember, fannie lou hamer had to fight other black leaders to speak. but why? they didn't feel this country, illiterate, person had the right quality of voice to speak for black people, and the sad truth is, more black people sounded like fannie lou hamer than any of the others. So I say this to you Speakhertruth for you to comprehend, the heritage that has given you difficulty has a beginning in our community. It isn't merely random negative chiding. it comes from black people judging other black people based on the differences of heritage or culture, which only creates more negative biases. As I have said in this forum many times, The village has many tribes in the USA. The black village isn't one tribe, it is many tribes. A tribe is the college educated, A tribe is the illegal financial operators, a tribe is the black militants who want to kill , a tribe is the black christians who chide non violence, a tribe is...one of many and our community in the usa since the war between the states has seen the generation/birth of many tribes, but the cohesion of next to none of them. The 1960s is the proof. if the nation of islam/the sbclc- southern black christian leadership conference/the naacp- even while white finances/the black panthers for self defense could had worked together better things would had been better. but... the nation of islam had a religious dislike with christian, the black christians had limits on how they would self defend, the naacp felt financial integration side whites was better, the black panthers were too segregationist. It isn't fair that some black people in the past wanted to not be black and suggested that the way they talked made them superior to other black folk. but they did and the legacy of such actions requires the future to deal with. if it can

@Pioneer1 all good fun of course yes, she was the highest ranking female in the original show and until the female doctor in next generation.

MY THOUGHTS I will try and share what I can from this webinar with screen shots or quotes. And definitely try to regale points. we will see. INFO A Webinar with the South Side Home Movie Project + Orientation to New Online Tagging Tools Hosted by the Chicago Public Library 6:30pm, Wednesday, March 29, 2023 Register here before 3pm for the Zoom link Home movies capture a range of details about everyday neighborhood life in Chicago, from fashion to food to how people walk down the street. During moments of social change, they also show historic events from a unique perspective, revealing what it was like to watch Myrlie Evers receive a posthumous award for her husband Medgar in Grant Park in 1963, or to visit the Wall of Respect in Grand Boulevard in 1968. The South Side Home Movie Project has been collecting and preserving home movies from Chicago’s South Side neighborhoods since 2005, and now holds over 700 of these rare glimpses of South Side life in their local film archive. For Women’s History Month, join the SSHMP team in partnership with Chicago Public Library for a virtual guided tour of the project, featuring home movies with women both behind and in front of the camera, from the 1920s-1980s. SPECIAL NOTE: This session will also debut SSHMP’s new Community Tagging Tools, which let you add your own memories to the home movie database and identify the people, places and events you recognize. For the first time, Chicagoans from across the city are invited to try out this custom crowd-sourcing interface so that your stories become part of SSHMP’s virtual archive. Join us for a live demonstration and hands-on orientation to this new way to contribute your memories to Chicago’s history. How to Attend This event takes place on Zoom; click here to register by 3:00 pm Weds, 3/29/23. Only one registration per household is needed. You’ll receive an email link to the secure Zoom link before the event. Automatic transcription is included in all CPL events using Zoom. Image: Dr. Helen Nash filming at Niagara Falls, 1959, from the Dr. Helen Nash Collection. https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2294&type=status