It's a Headline

A recent news story caught my eye. Headlines are likely written to draw our attention, and it works sometimes, see Could it be a Trait? (April 2025); and Allegations of First Responder Social Security Fraud (January 2014). And headlines have sometimes been less than accurate. See What is a Claim? Let's be Accurate (August 2018).

Intended or not, we are seemingly drawn to headlines.

I have been critical over the years of various attorneys and judges, and that has identified challenges and behavior. In many of those posts, I have avoided naming the individual. Nonetheless, there are instances of poor choices. They reflect on those individuals, but often are impactful on the legal profession.

A specific example, not present in the most recent situation, is taking people's money. Theft is a conduct that is difficult to understand and which cannot be condoned. See A Slow Process (November 2025) and Then Arrested (August 2020). There are many mistakes that can be made, but taking someone's livelihood is a serious one. Too often news stories focus on such behavior. There is less prevalence of headlines about an attorney improving the community or donating time to a great cause.

The most recent story that caught my eye was Florida lawyer arrested for allegedly attacking senior on board Norwegian Cruise Line ship, reported by The Independent. A similar story ran on USA Today, Cruise Ship News, and The Daily Mail. The headlines each said either "Miami Lawyer" or "Florida Attorney." The headlines make this about lawyers.

Headlines catch the eye. Lawyers are professionals. They hold a revered place in society and will therefore be likely to face scrutiny differently from other vocations. Had the accused in this instance been a plumber, store manager, or chauffeur, it is not likely that the title would have featured in the story. If "lawyer" is strong in headlines, it is likely "judge" is more so. That's worth remembering.

This instance occurred on the Norwegian Encore. The lawyer allegedly encountered a 67-year-old who told the lawyer he could not enter a "restricted area." The story makes no mention of the 67-year-old's vocation, but he is described as a passenger. It is therefore unlikely he was a Norwegian Lines official. Nonetheless, the 67-year-old told the lawyer he could not "go into the restricted area."

There are many in this world who take it upon themselves to direct the rest of us. I have often been told I cannot drive, walk, park, or stand somewhere. Perhaps their directions are for our safety. Perhaps they are deputized for such directions. Or, perhaps they are merely overzealous. Nonetheless, there are some who like to tell folks what and where to do. 

The attorney in this situation, a trained professional advocate, allegedly attempted to converse persuasively with the passenger to convince otherwise. He allegedly de-escalated (sarcasm, apologies) the situation with a simple “Who the f*** are you to tell me what I can and can’t do?” As unlikely as it may seem (apologies), this apparently did not calm the older passenger.

The attorney then allegedly escalated the situation with physical contact. That is almost never a good idea. Nonetheless, the attorney allegedly pushed the elderly passenger, punctuating his persuasive vocabulary. The older passenger allegedly pushed back, and a woman identified as the attorney's wife then allegedly joined the fray, also pushing the older passenger.

As a side note, the article makes no mention of the wife's vocation or occupation. For that matter, there is no mention of the older passenger's occupation. 

At some point in this tete-a-tete, the attorney allegedly "became enraged" and "continued to attack" the passenger. The passenger is said to have retreated into the very passageway he had initially tried to block, but the attorney got past the door and "allegedly charged at the elderly man."

The passenger tripped, fell, "landed on his head," and was unconscious. That is not a good outcome. The Associated Press recently reported that Older adults in the US are increasingly dying from unintentional falls. The World Health Organization claims that "Falls are the second leading cause of unintentional injury deaths worldwide." That is an astounding thought. Safety tip: avoid falls.

The attorney allegedly chose that moment to exercise de-escalation and walk away. That would have been an advisable action when the elderly passenger first tried to direct foot traffic. Some readers will question why the passenger was interceding in people's activity in the first instance. That is a fair point, and criticism may be warranted. Nonetheless, arguments and physicality are rarely advisable.

Had the lawyer and wife walked away when first confronted by the passenger, perhaps that would have been well advised. Perhaps they might have walked away after the unfortunate "f-bomb" and sought assistance from the ship's crew?

Nonetheless, they allegedly walked away after the fall, leaving the unconscious sexagenarian where he lay. Other passengers (this suggests that perhaps more than the three had by then entered the area that was allegedly closed) "stepped in to perform CPR on the elderly man," who "was later taken to a nearby hospital for treatment."

The attorney was arrested thereafter, though it is not clear whether before or after the cruise. His counsel spoke to the press and conveyed “My client vehemently denies that he is the primary aggressor.” In that, it is possible that there will be conflicting testimony and perhaps a finder of fact will conclude the attorney acted appropriately. 

However, the point is the behavior, the coverage, and the relevance.  The story is not about legal practice. It makes no mention of the occupation of either the passenger or the attorney's wife. Nonetheless, the article leads with the headline "Florida lawyer," (or "Miami Attorney") and concludes with a recitation from The Florida Bar website regarding his "good standing" to practice law. 

The story becomes about the occupation or profession, with the poor behavior being relegated to foundation. The real point should be "pushing people is wrong," and this should be true whether untoward words were uttered, behavior was inappropriate, or who was involved. In short, it is not relevant that the alleged assailant was an attorney. 

The profession is impacted. A person is accused and potentially guilty. A sexagenarian was injured, revived, and treated at a hospital. All of this is relevant. The situation is unfortunate, unflattering, and untoward. Nonetheless, the occupation is not the story. 

Smarter than Kim?

It will be decidedly rare that I hold up a celebrity as an example. There is little, in my experience, that they bring to the table for frank or even useful discussion. Certainly, their perspective matters, but no more or less than anyone else's.

At a recent lecture, we devolved into a discussion of the challenges of law school and the bar examination. A college student voiced some trepidation regarding the testing requirements for bar membership, to which another noted, "Kim Kardashian did it," and a lively debate ensued.

To be clear, Ms. Kardashian has not passed the bar exam (she passed the "baby bar exam"). But a great many famous folks failed a bar exam along the way. I have met a few who did not pass the exam on the first or even second try. Those I have met are nice people. Some I practiced against were adequate attorneys. Nonetheless, it is not a good sign when someone who has three years of quality education cannot pass the exam.

There is one rub. Ms. Kardashian elected not to attend law school. Now, many who did will likely tell you they did not learn much from their law school professors. But most I have spoken with admit they learned a great deal from the scholarly experience. This includes the reading, the discussing with classmates, and the processing that is a blue book exam. Of course, for many, it also includes life skills like eating on less than $20 per week, but I digress.

By the time a law school attendee reaches the bar exam, they have written thousands of words in response to conniving and contriving interlocutors. In other words, they are used to the exercise and they have built muscles for it.

So, let us not be too hard on Ms. Kardashian. After all, despite not being a lawyer, she plays one on television. But there is a point raised in my recent classroom discussion that is worthy of further attention.

In a recently published Vanity Fair interview, Ms. Kardashian explained that she uses ChatGPT for legal advice. With all that has been written about the advent of large language models (LLM), hallucination, and unreliability, that is simply astounding. It is an admission on par with "I often perform surgery on myself and friends, despite never studying medicine."

She noted that she "use(s) it for legal advice." She inputs a concept and looks to the LLM to provide solid and useful analysis, and Kardashian said, “When I am needing to know the answer to a question, I’ll take a picture and snap it and put it in there.”

She confided that the answers provided were "always wrong." Thus, ChatGPT has "made (her) fail tests all the time." Uh, no, and neither has people allowing me to do surgery on them "made" them suffer injury and death (this is fictitious; I have never performed surgery). 

No one (or thing) "made" Ms. Kardashian "fail tests." Non one "made" anyone do anything. This statement is about as delusional as "the devil made me do it."

Having received LLM advice she did not like, she has been further disappointed that the LLM has been less than supportive. She blames the tech for her failure. But, in a constructive manner (sarcasm), she has found it helpful to "get mad and yell at it and be like, ‘You made me fail. Why did you (do) this?’" This, according to Futurism. 

No, yelling almost never helps anyone in any manner unless their point is to somehow become hoarse. And yelling at a machine is perhaps even less likely to help than yelling into the Grand Canyon.

Despite the increasingly lifelike nature of chatbots, they are not human. They are computer programs. Sophisticated, complex, and intriguing computer programs. You do not blame your car for "making" you wreck, your fork for "making" you fat, or your LLM for "making" you flunk. You put the responsibility where it belongs, on you.

So, the real point is simple. If you dream of a legal career, find a good educational program. Strive to enroll in a school that offers you instruction, interaction, and growth. Don't take shortcuts, such as relying blindly on law professors, fellow students, or computer programs to tell you the answer. Understand that the answer in the law is almost always "adult diapers." 

The answer for the lawyer is rarely "the answer," but an interpretation, argument, or nuance through which the advocate expresses understanding of and application of the law. The answer almost always "depends," and even the best LLM will not master that nuance and complexity as a well-trained lawyer can. 

For Whom?

I have recently taken to a taste in walking music that would be unfamiliar to most in my aging cohort. My streaming service channel delivers such artists as TAELA, Hailee Steinfeld, Tate McRae, jax, Ava Max, Chloe Adams, Leah Kate, Ana Clendening, Mimi Webb, Madison Beer, Chelsea Collins, Halsey, Ke$ha, and similar. Most of my readers will recognize perhaps only one or two (if any) of those names.

It is a genre designed and destined for a younger crowd. Let's "be real"; when you get to be my age, essentially everyone is a younger crowd. It struck me recently that this music "channel" has evolved in regard to its advertising. We all know that advertising is targeted. They do not push Sugar Corn Pops during news shows, and they do not push blood pressure monitor brands in rom-com movies.

For a long time, the advertising I heard on that channel was for a particular toilet tissue, a soft drink, a tempting fast food outlet, and the occasional cosmetic product. Those never struck me as out of the ordinary or unexpected. However, I was surprised recently when repetitive pharmacy advertisements began to occur between the ballads of the youthful and soulful artists above.

The drug names are not important, but the context is interesting to me.

One advertised drug is supposed to treat a malady that was new to me: ATTR-CM. Sometimes acronyms are for saving space. Other times, we use them because no one could pronounce the actual thing: "Transthyretin-mediated amyloidosis." Apologies to my medical compatriots; we know you can pronounce it, but the rest of us, not so much. The ads encourage me to "ask my doctor."

My unfamiliarity with ATTR-CM made me wonder, how prevalent is this disease that is popping up every few songs in my feed? A bit of research revealed that this is sometimes hereditary (hATTR) and sometimes idiopathic (wtATTR). Either sounds ominous.

I found the condition described in Epidemiology of transthyretin (ATTR) amyloidosis: a systematic literature review, Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, January 16, 2025. The title "rare diseases" was perhaps an initial clue? How common is this "rare disease?" It turns out that is hard to estimate, and depends on geography. That said, the study authors conclude that

"ATTR prevalence ranged from 6.1/million in the US to 232/million in Portugal"

Spoiler alert, I am not listening to my dance, contemporary pop, or indie pop while streaming in Portugal. I am right here in Paradise (where it is currently the year 1972, but it is nonetheless the U.S.).

That was intriguing to me: 6.1 people in a million may be affected by this disease/condition. That is 0.00061%. To reach a volume of 1 million people in the Florida Panhandle, you would need Escambia (334,516), Santa Rosa (211,737), Okaloosa (221,342), Walton (92,944), Washington (27,461), Holmes (20,090), Jackson (51,229), Calhoun (13,059), Gulf (15,995), and Liberty Counties (8,139), and you would still be a few short (total is only 996,512). 

Geographically, driving east across Florida on I-10 from Alabama, you would be just shy of Gadsden and Leon Counties (Tallahassee), or about 180 miles into Florida (leaving out only Bay County, Panama City) to compile such a population. In that expanse, there would seemingly be 6.1 people who need to ask their doctor about the "rare disease" Transthyretin-mediated amyloidosis.

To get over 10 people (12.2), you would need to include the following territory:

And, according to some, the average age of onset for this disease is >60 years"; though the onset of the "hereditary" disease "can be 30+ years old." About 38% of the U.S. population is under 30 years old; 77% is under 60.  Therefore, even in the two million people between Alabama and I-75 (see above), the statistics suggest a very small cohort in the affected age groups, and a minuscule potential for this malady. The rarity in general makes one question why the advertising. 

But the narrow listening band presents only greater scarcity. Not to put too fine a point on it, I am likely the only person over 50 in the world listening to this particular music channel. The "over 30" listener population for these artists is also unlikely to be all that large. Of the 6-10 people in the Florida panhandle that may have ATTR-CM, I am doubtful any are listening to this music or hearing this ad. 

Somehow, it is in the advertiser's interest to pepper the music service channel catering primarily to the 16-25-year-old, TikTok-thematic audience of the artists to which I listen with advertisements for medication for an admittedly "rare disease" that affects the target audience of hits from the 70s, 80s, and 90s.  Is it random? Is it me?

From a broad perspective, there seems incongruity. I am convinced I must be missing something. Or, perhaps, I am channeling Rosanne Rosannadanna. 

"My Way?"

The title of this post is the title of one of the King's hits, written by Paul Anka and others in the early 1970s. Elvis Presley--I have never been a big Elvis fan, but he was iconic in my childhood. A great many people I ran into claimed his acquaintance, worshiped his talent, and revered his presence. 

My Way had reflective lyrics. The writers are compelling us to live a life fulfilled, to do it our own way:

"And more, much more than this
I did it my way
Regrets, I've had a few
But then again, too
Few to mention
I did what I had to do"

In Missouri, there is a judge who has done it his way. A "funny" way.

There is a place in legal proceedings for humor. The hearing room environment can be unfamiliar, even alien. The experience is infrequent for most, and for some, the experience will be once-in-a-lifetime. There are those who see humor as a method for diminishing the angst and anxiety caused by unfamiliarity and uncertainty.

In Night Court (May 2025), the efforts of a Florida Circuit judge are described. The humor reported in that instance might be characterized as crass. There are other thoughts on judicial humor referenced in that post. Humor is a difficult endeavor in any setting, only more so in judicial proceedings.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) recently reported on a Missouri judge being "disciplined for wearing Elvis wig in court." That makes for a catchy headline, but there is more to the story. Though the BBC has some credibility challenges, similar stories about this judge appear on the N.Y. Times, Associated Press, and St. Louis Magazine. 

Judge Matthew Thornhill recently resigned from the circuit bench in St. Charles County. The news notes he is "the longest-serving circuit judge" there, and Ballotpedia says he was elected in 2014. That posting contains the indicia that it is incomplete or dated: "term that expires on December 31, 2018." Nonetheless, it appears he first ran in 2010 and has served since. 

The Ballotpedia page also notes he was "reprimanded" as an attorney for his actions as a "county prosecutor in 2006." He allegedly "asked a forgery defendant for a baseball autographed by former football star Terry Bradshaw." That is a curious sidenote; it seems a bit like asking Stan Lee to autograph a DC comic.

The humor element, as described by the BBC, includes the judge wearing a preposterous pompadour wig and sunglasses a la Elvis Presley during court proceedings. This was on or around Halloween. The judge also "would give litigants or witnesses the option of being sworn in while playing Elvis music from his phone." Perhaps there are those who would find these entertaining or amusing, but comforting?

The story also notes that Judge Thornhill would "refer to (Elvis) occasionally during court proceedings." This included "mentioning his date of birth or death" as well as interjecting various "lyrics from his music." 

The judge noted that he now understands "that this could affect the integrity and solemnity of the proceedings." Nonetheless, he believed he benefitted those present by adding "levity at times when I thought it would help relax litigants." Can you see "all shook up" as a calming influence?

Nonetheless, it appears that other factors may have driven the conclusions of "Missouri's Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges." While the BBC story says the Commission report mentions all of the foregoing, the report also includes more serious allegations or conclusions:

"sharing his political affiliation or preferred candidates in elections from the bench." See Canon 4, Missouri Code of Judicial Conduct.

"promoting his own election campaign by asking witnesses, lawyers and litigants if they had seen his 'Thornhill for Judge' signs around town." See Canon 4, Missouri Code of Judicial Conduct.

Failing "to maintain order and decorum in the courtroom." See Canons 1 and 2, Missouri Code of Judicial Conduct.

The Commission "recommended he be suspended without pay for six months, then serve for another 18 months before retiring." Judge Thornhill responded with a letter that "did not dispute any of the allegations" and asserted that "he had made a mistake." The tenor seems to suggest he perhaps made several mistakes. 

Nonetheless, he essentially "agreed to the terms set out by the Commission, which allowed him to conclude his service on the bench and retire after 20 years."

From this, it appears the judge will be away briefly, but will be back on the bench before his eventual retirement. The six-month suspension without pay is a significant punishment from any perspective. According to Government Salaries, Missouri circuit judges make $156,055 per year, and so this penalty is about $ 78,027. That is a notable amount. But he will be back, perhaps acting as before?

There are lessons here. First, the easy reinforcement of the perils of humor. The fact is simple—humor is in the eyes of the beholder. What one sees as hilarious, another may see as irrelevant, insulting, crass, ribald, or worse. Judicial attempts at humor, if any, should be bland, brief, and universal (e.g., "I can't find my pen; I would lose my head if it were not attached").  

Second, the engagement in political activity by a judge is a clear impropriety. Some think Twain said "Never discuss politics or religion in polite company." It is hard to find any reference to support that, but it is nonetheless sound advice for all. Those topics will generate strong emotions, and conflict. Humor is just as risky.  

Judicial proceedings do not need additional emotions. And judges should remember, discussing politics is a topic of specific Code focus. Despite the tendency to view the Code as something less than defining, it is a valid and helpful guide (most judges like declining to help raise money at the local school bake sale). 

Finally, in any judicial comments (and perhaps all comments everywhere), "in the end you gotta listen to yourself." Judges should present their public persona with a focus on business, with a side of humility, cordiality, and dignity. That will calm the participants much more than quoting a pop icon of any era, or playing music in proceedings. 

Yes, do it "your way," but make your impression with professionalism and decorum, not corny jokes, lyrics, and buffoonery. Judging does not require a costume, and no costume will enhance your role. 

Revisiting Limitations

In December 2024, the Florida First District decided Ortiz v. Winn Dixie, Inc., 1D2021-0885, see Ortiz is Decided Again (December 2024). That decision had an intriguing procedural history that is described in that post. There is also a chronology to aid in understanding the August 2020 to December 2024 progression in that case.

The history of Ortiz created uncertainty in the community regarding the workers' compensation statute of limitations. And the ultimate decision in December 2024 left various questions for another day. That is often the case with litigation; judges address the questions the parties raise and litigate.

There is a potential that the Florida workers' compensation community will soon learn more regarding the statute of limitations in section 440.19. In this, litigation is like physics. Fundamental to physics, energy may be expended or stored.

When energy is stored, scientists refer to that energy as "potential" or "at rest." In the Newtonian model, this energy waits to be acted upon by some outside force, thus enabling or releasing it ("A body at rest stays at rest," Newton's first law).

For more on Newtonian workers' compensation, see Conflicting Rights (April 2024), AI in Your Hand (April 2024), Sometimes an Angel (March 2024), Potential Energy (March 2024), Comparative Redux (March 2023), "No Driver" Wins a Race to the Bottom (April 2018), Defining "Progress" (December 2016), What is Right with Comp? (June 2016).

Thus, I use the term "potential" because perhaps there is a harbinger, as the District Court announced it will consider en banc a trial decision that concluded the statute of limitations had expired in a case. That decision to proceed en banc may suggest to some that a significant decision could be coming regarding the interpretation of section 440.19.

Similarly, the Florida Supreme Court granted jurisdiction in 2024 in Normandy Ins. Co. v. Bouayad, 372 So. 3d 671, 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023), review granted, No. SC2023-1576, 2024 WL 4449458 (Fla. Oct. 9, 2024). That granting of review suggests to some that the Court could do something different than the District Court opinion concluded. There is, thus, "potential" in the Supreme Court's acceptance of jurisdiction (authority) and that it granted oral argument in June 2025.

Of course, there are various potentials in any appellate review. The reviewing court may take a particular course that is novel, restorative of the trial decision, or simply overruling the trial decision. Thus, review does not equate to change but suggests it could happen—it remains, for the moment, "potential."

To the original point above, the District Court has granted en banc review of Estes v. Palm Beach County School District, Case 1D2025-0079 (OJCC Case 24-014555GJJ)(Order of December 12, 2025). The review en banc means that the entire court will consider the appeal rather than a three-judge panel. To some, this may suggest the court views the topic as important or challenging.

En banc review has some intriguing history in Florida workers' compensation. See Lessons in the Law (August 2023), Reminders and Lessons on Appellate Review (December 2021), Constitutional Law in Florida 2016 (December 2016), Westphal is Over, Questions Remain (June 2016), Stare Decisis, Goodgame, Livingood, and Westphal (October 2015), Court Watching (May 2015), Westphal is Decided (September 2013).

The trial judge in Estes concluded that the statute of limitations had expired, thus barring the claimant's claims for benefits. This 2024 trial decision noted the 2023 Ortiz decision and some reliance on it. However, that opinion had been withdrawn. Days before the Estes trial decision, the court had issued its new Ortiz decision, also noted by the trial judge.

The 2024 Ortiz decision did not address "tolling" of the statute as the original 2023 decision had. The trial judge in Estes noted that the 2024 Ortiz decision included "a comprehensive concurring opinion," which did address "tolling," but concluded that a concurring opinion was not controlling.

The trial judge also noted prior decisions by the court interpreting section 440.19, including Orange County School Board v. Best, 728 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), Claims Management, Inc. v. Philip, 746 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), Varitimidis v. Walgreen Company, 58 So. 3d 406 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011), Sanchez v. American Airlines, 169 So. 3d 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), and American Airlines Group v. Lopez, 388 So. 3d 843 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024). See also David W. Langham, Fla. Work. Comp.; History, Evolution, and Function, 2023.

The December 2024 trial decision in Estes concluded that various prior appellate court  decisions "remain binding precedent." In that vein, the district court has reminded:

"Although a lower tribunal or court may bring its concerns regarding the application of specific case law to the appellate courts, it is nonetheless bound to follow precedent." Andrews v. McKim & Creed, 355 So. 3d 957, 963 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023).

The interpretation of 440.19 will thus be considered by the appellate court en banc and decided, likely in 2026. There is the potential that the various discussions of the statute of limitations and tolling will be clarified, though the outcome could be an "affirmed" that leaves questions for further discussion. And, as in Bouayad, there is always the potential, except in the event of a simple per curiam affirmed, that some party could seek further review from the Florida Supreme Court. 

Time will tell. 

Buzzwords 2025

Bureaucracy, Cuts, Flat, Data Center, Efficiencies, Growth, Productivity, Faster, Impact, Impinge, Innovation, Prepared, Relieved, Reorganizing, Shrunk, Smashing, Strategic, Transform, Trendsetter, Turmoil, Upheaval.

These words are all used in a recent Washington Post article that is likely the analysis every working person needs to read. These summarize the essence of 2025 as we head into the homestretch and begin to focus on our future in 2026.

The implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) have been on our minds. Certainly, some are thinking of it more than others. If you are not considering how it will impact you, you should reconsider. I am not saying your sky is falling, but ask yourself--what if it does?

The Post authors focus us on an inversion occurring in the workplace of today with implications for tomorrow. Viewed in retrospect, as we so often do, 2025 will be remembered for various things. A primary point, however, will be regression. 

No, not the "recession" that has been a persistent threat in the news. That economic potential is a perennial concern, as is the marketplace friction between money supply and inflation. Undoubtedly, 2025 will be remembered for economics, both micro and macro. 

But let us consider the term "regression" instead. The "trend or shift toward a lower or less perfect state." By "less perfect" we could mean less desirable, a subjectivity, less stable, an objectivity, or something in between. In my context here, I suggest it as a valid description for both micro desirability and macro stability.

The Post suggests that the tech industry is a proverbial "canary in a coal mine." The impacts of AI are being felt there now, and the suggestion is that those ripples will soon cross more ponds as implications spread and acceptance grows. 

Like the inversion suggested by the financial gurus, see Even the Experts (November 2025), the tech experts perceive an incongruity that is noteworthy. Big expansion, innovation, and paradigm change have often been accompanied by job growth, real estate demand, and similar practical demands.

That expectation is easy to see. New requires adaptation and adjustment. Those require more hands on deck to accommodate and implement. Innovation means increased labor demand and facilities in which to house them. 

Not so fast. 

The tech industry is thriving. The whole of Silicon Valley is said to be in a "boom," with "billions of dollars (pouring) into developing technology." Companies are achieving market capitalizations that use the word "trillion," and the volume of investment is incredible. 

Construction is proceeding at an incredible pace, but not for office space. The construction is focused on rooms to house more computers, bigger computers, more powerful computers. The term "data center" has evolved in 2025 from a sidenote to a buzzword. 

The regression is from a state of stable and ready employment for the tech-abled to one of doubt and uncertainty. See Did they WARN You? (November 2025). I suggested years ago that technology would change the world. See Another AI Invasion, Meritocracy? (January 2017), but see Kiosks and Expectations (September 2024) and the references there.

Despite the technology boom that persists in Silicon Valley and beyond, there has been a parade of layoffs, downsizing, and efficiency. The authors note 2025's 17% increase in "job cuts so far (117,000) in the tech sector." While that sounds troubling, it turns out the losses are "much steeper" in California (Silicon Valley). 

Artificial Intelligence is enhancing worker productivity. The innovation of this tool is actually diminishing the value of its creators. With each cycle of improvement, the tool becomes that much more efficient at both productivity and at crafting further innovation of the tools. 

The authors, and those they cite, see this as a harbinger of the future. They see the impact of AI creating efficiencies in general while it also enhances and improves itself. They suggest that this "could be a signal of how AI is going to impinge on other sectors."

The pundits say that these changes are illustrated in the tech sector. They note that sector is "in turmoil right now," and suggest that turmoil will spread through other sectors as the wave of innovation, efficiency, and efficacy spread to and through the daily tasks of workers in various vocations. 

There will be job losses. 

I liken the AI boom to the internal combustion engine. Yes, that dastardly device that so many pearl-clutchers decry and yet depend upon daily. Certainly, that device was industrial, but its impact was much broader. 

In 1892, John Froelich built a gas "engine that could be driven backwards and forwards." That year, 43% of Americans worked on farms. The advent of that engine, and the resulting "tractor" rapidly diminished the volume of labor needed to farm. The result was devastating to the farm hand market. By 1930, that 43% was cut by more than half to 21%. 

Simultaneously, the same concept of engines and mechanization brought automobiles, roads, enhanced tourism, and commerce. Those innovations brought new vocations, interests, and economic (r)evolution. That one disruptive and radical idea spurred both economic ruin (farm hands) and massive expansion. 

AI will be no different. There will be winners and losers. There will be innovations that we have yet to dream of, and occupations that will go the way of the buggy whip. That change will be difficult, involve pain (growing and contracting), and will bring unexpected benefits and burdens. 

Nonetheless, your grandparents survived change, just as did their grandparents. The change will produce change. The rate will ebb and flow, but the change itself will be inevitable, inexorable, and unpredictable. Yes, all those buzzwords at the top bear your consideration. 

Death and Taxes?

We are all on a one-way trip to a known destination. This life ends for each of us. See Hopelessness and the American Middle Class (April 2017). We can strive to exercise some degree of control in the speed of our demise, but the result is ultimately a predetermined eventuality—"death and taxes," as some luminary proposed. 

Death comes for us all. That realization comes to each of us, and has been reinforced for me recently with the persistence of notifications. And there are implications, both professional, see How to Transition Cases upon the Death of Counsel (December 2014), and personal, see What is a Donor? (August 2025).

In addition, there are multiple thoughts on related topics like Who Should Live? (January 2023), and the incredible volume of people who die of avoidable circumstances like overdose, see What Worthwhile Can You do in 11.2 Minutes (December 2015). Reflecting on these and other posts, it occurs to me I have focused on death more than a few times. 

In 2010, the idea of death was humorized on The Big Bang Theory, The Cruciferous Vegetable Amplification (September 30, 2010). There, the protagonist, Sheldon, "works out that he won't live long enough to download his consciousness into a robot." That is his plan for immortality.

Sheldon considers the longevity demonstrated by his family, and predicts his own life expectancy. He explains to his friends that he must improve his diet in order to live long enough for this potential to be a reality. He refers to it as "the singularity." 

He contends that date will be in 2045, or roughly 35 years after that 2010 episode. The show was entertaining and educational. Its spinoff, Young Sheldon, actually had a guest spot by Elon Musk. That was a play on re-using rockets and is good for a laugh. 

In an odd coincidence (or not) Mr. Musk was recently asked about the potential to achieve "eternal life" through uploading our individual consciousness to a robotic vessel. This would be one step beyond the artificial intelligence "scraping" of our every thought and expression today. 

Benzinga reports that Mr. Musk sees uploading as a real potential due to the convergence of two technologies, humanoid robots and the brain implant called Neurolink. He postulates that the link could be used to "upload a digital copy of your mind—memories, thoughts, personality quirks" to a robot. If possible to a robot, why not to a simple harddrive?

Immortality. Artificial, but immortality nonetheless.

By 2045 as postulated by The Big Bank? Mr. Musk, in November 2025, postulated, "Less than 20 years from now, it may be possible." Now, there may be a coincidence in the two of them hitting a similar timeline (or Mr. Musk might be a fan of the show). But the simple prediction remains that many of today's Earth residents might be uploaded.

The idea of keeping Judge Langham around forever in a robot might unnerve more than a few of us. And there might be others whose preservation might concern us even more. Would this be limited to a single person(ality) to a single hard drive, or might a single computer house thousands of us like blog posts, documents, or recordings? 

The implications are mind-blowing. If there are thousands of us together on some drive or network, could we communicate, collaborate, or commiserate? Would we want to? Would our preferences matter?

Would that preserved "snapshot" be a permanent record of who I was at that moment? Or would it merely serve as a foundation for something different or perhaps more? Might the computer me of tomorrow be a combination of computer me of today plus new experiences, thoughts, and exposures of the computer? 

Would the uploaded "snapshot" remain static, or would it evolve and grow? If it evolves, when would it cease to be me? When do I cease to be me?

To say this is all fascinating is an understatement of epic proportions. The potentials and questions seem as infinite as the possiblities. Would we be compensated, or merely scraped like our blogs?

Kids' Chance 2025

I attended a recent meeting of the Board of Kids' Chance of Florida. This is a 501 charity that provides scholarships for the children of injured workers. There are multiple such corporations across the country, of various names, which are all affiliates of Kids Chance of America (some call them chapters as if there is some top-down restraint or control; there is not). The Kids' Chance movement should not be news to frequent readers, I have discussed it here before:

The #WCI2016 is off and Running! (August 2016)

Kids' Chance, an Organization, a Movement (November 2016)

Outstanding Florida Millennials Recognized (June 2017)

A Great day with WCCP in Bonita (June 2018)

Give Kids the World - Our Community (August 2018)

Fitting Good into Busy Lives (November 2018)

Injuries can Affect the Whole Family (March 2021)

Kids' Chance Challenge (May 2021)

Live In Orlando - 2021! (August 2021)

What is Different (December 2021)

Laissez Les Bons Temps Rouler! (February 2022)

Our Hope for Tomorrow (August 2022)

It Was Palpable (August 2023)

WCI 2024 is Upon Us (August 2024)

The Ambassadors of Kids' Chance (November 2024)

In Just Another Week? (November 2024), I noted my departure from the Board of Kids' Chance of Florida (KCFL). That transition has been challenging for me. You do not invest ten years of your life in something and walk away without some sentiment. In that post, I also acknowledged the founding board and their contributions. Most of them served ten years and built an amazing foundation.

In December 2025, attending the annual Board meeting as an "emeritus," I watched two more of the early Board members transition to emeritus status: Jim McConnaughhay and Kimberly H. Staats. It was an odd moment for me, and the reflection was poignant. 

Everyone knows the legend that is Jim. He has been in this community since passing the bar exam in 1913 (kidding, it was 1969). He has touched education, litigation, regulation, and legislation. He has been integral, a man who "needs no introduction." I would go on, but he will likely be perturbed that I said this much. Jim can be a bit unassuming. 

Ms. Staats works for the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI). She came to KCFL as a volunteer and served as treasurer for several years. She was integral in our evolution of scholarship application processes and leadership. She spearheaded the KCFL annual care package program. An amazing idea that communicates commitment, support, and enthusiasm to these students as they pursue their futures. She is a 2007 graduate of the University of Central Florida and earned her MBA in 2018 from Lynn University. She has been at NCCI for 18 years in various roles and is currently Director of Strategy and Risk Management.  

During the recent meeting, I caught myself thinking, "Where will Kids' Chance be without these two?" What a vacuum! And as I pondered that, I began to write this post (mea culpa for typing while listening, but I have no role during meetings at this point other than sitting in the meeting, nodding periodically, and beaming with pride).

The first thing that struck me was my limiting question: "these two." I stopped and admonished myself. Kids' Chance has been blessed with engaged, enthusiastic, and effective Board members and leaders. Certainly, Kimberly Staats' transition from the presidency is somewhat jarring. 

But as I reflected, I found in my memories that I felt the same twinge of angst when Ray Neff concluded his term, then Bob Wilson, Linda Vendette, William Rogner, and Stacy Hosman. These are the community giants on whose shoulders Kids' Chance launched, grew, and soared. I would go on, but they will each likely be perturbed that I said this much. Like Jim, they can each be a bit unassuming.

With each leader, KCFL grew, evolved, and built. Each time, KCFL transitioned to new leadership with some sense of loss, but truthfully, KCFL never faltered. The purpose and the mission only strengthened, and the imperative only grew: find more kids, and award more scholarships.

With the new emeritus status of Jim and Kimberly, the Board gains two new members. 

Sean O'Connor is a defense attorney in Florida workers' compensation claims. He defends carriers, self-insureds, and municipalities. He has been with the McConnaughhay firm since 1999. He manages their Central Florida offices and is a regular speaker at educational seminars on a wide variety of workers' compensation issues. 

Julie McKenzie serves as the Corporate Accounting and Tax Manager at NCCI, bringing in over six years of experience with the company. She ensures compliance with accounting standards and tax regulations while making improvements in the organization’s accounting and tax processes. She earned a bachelor's from Notre Dame and a master's from FAU, and she is a Florida CPA.

They join the existing Board:

Tammy Boyd, President
TRISTAR Insurance Group

Jenna Sutton, Vice President
Medical Management and Re-Employment

David Cruz, Treasurer
Paradigm

Basilios Manousogiannakis, Secretary
Amerisafe

Barbara Case
State of Florida Office of Judges of Compensation Claims

Liz Corona
The Zenith Insurance Company

Brian Ricotta, Esq.
HR Law, P.A.

Andrew Sabolic
Workers’ Compensation Institute (WCI)

Kristy Sands
Gallagher Bassett

Josh Schuette
Brooks Rehabilitation

Marissa Shearer
Commercial Risk Management, Inc.

Janel Stephens
Bichler & Longo, PLLC

Olivia Wilms
Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission

Change. It happens. It is inevitable. There is some emotion every time I see KCFL in action. I have not been on the Board for a year now, and I still attend their meetings. I am motivated, perhaps inspired, by the energy, enthusiasm, and esprit de corps of this incredible group of community leaders. They are changing the world one deserving student at a time, and I admire them all. 

If you know a student who could benefit, make an anonymous referral.

The Arms Race Continues

I first posited the concept of an "arms race" in May 2024. I was early to the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) and have written dozens of posts. I have returned to the optic of an "arms race" in many public settings and presentations, and it was back in this blog in Should we Pause? (January 2025), Better look that up (July 2025), and Another Arms Race (October 2025). It is beginning to rack up as many sequels as Terminator (Orion 1984).

That said, the concept was in the news recently, related to both AI and the ever elusive cybersecurity that faces us every day. Like it or not, much about each of us is out there in the ether waiting to be discovered, hijacked, or worse. 

Enter AI, which is largely designed to resist doing evil and to focus on being good. That said, there is no telling what Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un, and Masoud Pezeshkian have their teams cooking up. And though those three have demonstrated seriously evil proclivities, they all seem somewhat reasonable if you put them into focus by standing them next to Putin. 

The fact is that you don't need some fictitious Dr. Evil, Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Auric Goldfinger, and Dr. No. Various real evil overlords have their teams working on AI, cyberbreach, theft, and more.

Fortune reported in November 2025 that Anthropic (Purveyor of Claude AI) discovered that Claude was essentially hijacked and tricked into being a hacker. That is scary enough, that AI can be tricked. But the miscreants in this example were not all that imaginative. 

They told Claude that they were a cybersecurity team testing their own defenses. They essentially "jailbroke" the program and convinced it to do things it had been told not to do. If you follow the news at all, you know various AI large language models (LLM) have been tricked, cajoled, and highjacked. 

This instance is worthy of attention not because of novelty, but severity. The cyberattack orchestrated by Anthropic allowed an attack of incredible proportions. It would have take vast amounts of time for a human team," but was simple for the AI. The "AI made thousands of requests, often multiple per second." No human team could have accomplished the breadth and intensity of this attack. 

Where is the arms race?

Anthropic responded. It has "upgraded its detection systems," implemented new tools, and is engaging with its peers to "share case studies" and "help those in industry, government, and the wider research community strengthen their own cyber defenses." 

The miscreants use their imagination. They try, test, and repeat. Their efforts are focused and persistent. Those who would resist attacks, protect data, and assure system availability and security must be as persistent or more. With each innovation, there is opportunity for the miscreants and danger for us all. 

NBC has reported North Korea stealing "$1.5 billion worth of Ethereum." The BBC has reported $2 billion was stolen by North Korea and that "regime-linked hackers who now account for around 13% of North Korea's gross domestic product (GDP)." Of course, there are challenges now in believing what you read from the BBC. Despite the BBC credibility gap, there is significant evidence that theft is occurring. 

The miscreants will not pause or retreat. The only path forward is the responsive defense building. The arms race continues. With each economic benefit we enjoy from evolving technology, we will face costs resulting from efforts to protect it. 

Tech in Safety

There has been a long and storied history of increasing workplace safety in America, coupled with the inverse decreasing frequency of workplace injury. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) noted at the turn of the century that "since 1971" the progress had been significant:

"workplace fatalities have been cut by 60 percent, and occupational injury and illness rates, by 40 percent"

The trend has only continued. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports that the "incident rate of nonfatal injuries" in 1972 was about "10.9 cases per 100 full-time workers," and by 2018 that had decreased to "2.8 cases." That is a 74% reduction. The visual of this BLS chart speaks volumes.

Reducing workplace injury is the most critical point of workers' compensation. The best outcome is for workers to not be injured in the first instances.

CNBC recently reported that workplace safety is being impacted by new technologies. This focuses on the avoidance of injuries as cameras evaluate workers leading to "behavioral modification and coaching." This is catching workplace errors that present risk of accident and injury. 

We have all been reminded of safety by technology. There are alerts in our vehicles that prompt seatbelt use. A reminder in a recent rental car told me to check the back seat each time I parked. There are lane-change alerts, parking assists, and much more that illustrate the tech reminders and reinforcements already present. 

The article touts results and endorsement of specific technology by one insurance carrier. That company's "three-year pilot program" demonstrated "a more than 70% reduction in workers' comp claims and a near elimination of racketeering charges." The implication is that the surveillance improves both safety per se and affects allegations more broadly. 

The safety impacts are notable. The proponents claim that "worker safety compliance" was "70% before implementation," and increased to between "97% to 100%." This is likely attributable to coaching that is noted, but is also perhaps intertwined with the knowledge that cameras are watching. Supervisors and workers alike are perhaps mindful of being observed. 

CNBC notes that the result of the pilot project has been a reduction of one company's experience modification rate (EMR). In most states, there is a set premium for workers' compensation. That is the rate at which coverage is purchased. But, just like some drivers have no tickets or accidents and others have many, employers may have different "experience" in workplace safety. 

So, if a company has an EMR of 1, then the rate it pays will be the set rate, that is rate times 1. But, as experience (accidents and injury) grows, the rate might be 1.5 and that employer is then paying 50% more for workers' compensation insurance. The pilot project company in this story dropped its EMR from .65 to .25. 

That represents a significant cost savings and will likely make the employer more competitive in bidding for work in the construction. CNBC stresses that this technology is present in non-construction industry settings. Thus, the savings are potentially important in various workplace settings. 

By the same token, the worker who seeks employment is better served to work somewhere that is amenable to safe practices. Employers that enforce safe workplace requirements and encourage safe activity are protecting the worker and, therefore, likely attract employees who value safety and protection. 

There will be those who criticize the presence of workplace surveillance. There will be thoughts raised about privacy and even productivity. Nonetheless, the BLS statistics noted above are compelling. Workers avoiding workplace injury or illness and the treatment, recover, and wage loss that can ensue are better served by safety. 

It is likely that technology will also evolve with the implementation of robotics and artificial intelligence (AI). Difficult tasks such as bending and lifting may be ameliorated or eliminated by these new technologies. The study of workplace performance by the surveillance will likely be evaluated and studied by AI; this may increasingly occur in real-time, affording management the chance to stop behavior before it harms.