Aidan
@nota-nota.bsky.social
My specific question I guess is, what exactly is "AI" defined as here, and what is the evidence for its role in being "decisive"?
September 8, 2025 at 1:30 AM
My specific question I guess is, what exactly is "AI" defined as here, and what is the evidence for its role in being "decisive"?
In particular I'm looking for more information relating to the claims in this paragraph. I can't see in the declassified documents any discussion of AI. I wouldn't be surprised if I'm missing something, though
September 8, 2025 at 1:21 AM
In particular I'm looking for more information relating to the claims in this paragraph. I can't see in the declassified documents any discussion of AI. I wouldn't be surprised if I'm missing something, though
Hi @stuartathompson.bsky.social, I'm reading your article www.nytimes.com/2025/06/26/t... and I'm interested in learning more about the influence of AI in the Romanian election. I'm struggling to find sources that discuss AI influence beyond the role of the TikTok algorithm. Can you help clarify ?
A.I. Is Starting to Wear Down Democracy
www.nytimes.com
September 8, 2025 at 1:16 AM
Hi @stuartathompson.bsky.social, I'm reading your article www.nytimes.com/2025/06/26/t... and I'm interested in learning more about the influence of AI in the Romanian election. I'm struggling to find sources that discuss AI influence beyond the role of the TikTok algorithm. Can you help clarify ?
Am I right to be reading the AI component in the russian influence in the Romanian election as mainly algorithmic? Or is there evidence that specifically generative AI played a major role? Would love to read more about that if so
September 5, 2025 at 12:28 AM
Am I right to be reading the AI component in the russian influence in the Romanian election as mainly algorithmic? Or is there evidence that specifically generative AI played a major role? Would love to read more about that if so
Wow, is that where that comes from? Average brain size and primate group size...?
May 7, 2025 at 12:23 AM
Wow, is that where that comes from? Average brain size and primate group size...?
I might personally pick easier myths to debunk. I do love the catty [sic], though:
May 5, 2025 at 10:07 AM
I might personally pick easier myths to debunk. I do love the catty [sic], though:
It seems reasonable to me, a simple man, to include inheritance in the original $5 million estimate from PPP. If the richest %1, who each have over $10 million, have at least $5 mil in inheritance + interest, that would indeed seem to support the supposedly debunked “progressive myth”
May 5, 2025 at 10:05 AM
It seems reasonable to me, a simple man, to include inheritance in the original $5 million estimate from PPP. If the richest %1, who each have over $10 million, have at least $5 mil in inheritance + interest, that would indeed seem to support the supposedly debunked “progressive myth”
Michael Huemer Destroys Liberal With Facts and Logic: Inheritance money is no big deal (the richest 1% have “only” inherited $719,000, not accounting for interest)
May 5, 2025 at 9:59 AM
Michael Huemer Destroys Liberal With Facts and Logic: Inheritance money is no big deal (the richest 1% have “only” inherited $719,000, not accounting for interest)
This was a very enjoyable and engaging read. There is a striking similarity between these Erasmian exercises and LLM content. Though I think the overall point is less grand than the prose suggests
If we want to better understand large language models, and what they are and aren’t capable of, we can look at earlier versions of the same technology – like Erasmian humanism
Who needs AI text-generation when there’s Erasmus of Rotterdam | Aeon Essays
Like today’s large language models, 16th-century humanists had techniques to automate writing – to the detriment of novelty
buff.ly
May 5, 2025 at 9:38 AM
This was a very enjoyable and engaging read. There is a striking similarity between these Erasmian exercises and LLM content. Though I think the overall point is less grand than the prose suggests
I wanted to reply snidely to this post, since the same could be said of so many technologies. But I think I wouldn’t feel great if I was helping build generative AI right now…
I hope everyone working on LLMs has reckoned with their role in building a technology that, so far, has offered little to no benefit to humanity — while causing real harm by degrading art, undermining labor in creative industries, and straight up automating political propaganda
May 5, 2025 at 9:28 AM
I wanted to reply snidely to this post, since the same could be said of so many technologies. But I think I wouldn’t feel great if I was helping build generative AI right now…
Do you have any particular person or piece of writing you could recommend that you think makes this point well? I find it hard to sift through the noise on this issue.
April 24, 2025 at 2:17 AM
Do you have any particular person or piece of writing you could recommend that you think makes this point well? I find it hard to sift through the noise on this issue.
I was very troubled to see people start consulting Grok on factual issues (asking "Grok, is this true?"), but then kind of stunned at how reasonable Grok actually seems to be, certainly relative to the average X user.
April 16, 2025 at 1:26 AM
I was very troubled to see people start consulting Grok on factual issues (asking "Grok, is this true?"), but then kind of stunned at how reasonable Grok actually seems to be, certainly relative to the average X user.
There are weird instances, where LLMs are wrong in really non-human ways, and those seem to be most dangerous. I'm thinking of cases where LLMs hallucinate very plausible sounding entities like journals, articles, people etc. That's likely to get better as the technology improves, though
April 16, 2025 at 1:24 AM
There are weird instances, where LLMs are wrong in really non-human ways, and those seem to be most dangerous. I'm thinking of cases where LLMs hallucinate very plausible sounding entities like journals, articles, people etc. That's likely to get better as the technology improves, though
We have a lot of tools for dealing with unreliable human communicators, and we can apply these to LLMs. Some people may have an inflated few of LLM capabilties right now, but will presumably adjust those with time
April 16, 2025 at 1:21 AM
We have a lot of tools for dealing with unreliable human communicators, and we can apply these to LLMs. Some people may have an inflated few of LLM capabilties right now, but will presumably adjust those with time
I think that, while there are occasional instances of surprising naivety toward the outputs of LLMs, people have a general, growing sense of their capabilities. I don't see any reason to think that people are fundamentally incapable of healthy skepticism toward LLMs
also people still don’t know that they make shit up and we are not culturally prepared in the least for a Computer That Lies
LLMs are fascinating technology objects that i love to think about and every time i encounter them in the real world i realize that they suck and they're making the world worse
April 16, 2025 at 1:20 AM
I think that, while there are occasional instances of surprising naivety toward the outputs of LLMs, people have a general, growing sense of their capabilities. I don't see any reason to think that people are fundamentally incapable of healthy skepticism toward LLMs
People seem to be claiming:
1. There is no anti-baby senitment on the left (obviously untrue, in my personal experience!!), and/or
2. Any policy targeted at increasing births is overreaching. But the suggested policies will be set in any case, and can be set to support greater or fewer births.
1. There is no anti-baby senitment on the left (obviously untrue, in my personal experience!!), and/or
2. Any policy targeted at increasing births is overreaching. But the suggested policies will be set in any case, and can be set to support greater or fewer births.
April 16, 2025 at 12:38 AM
People seem to be claiming:
1. There is no anti-baby senitment on the left (obviously untrue, in my personal experience!!), and/or
2. Any policy targeted at increasing births is overreaching. But the suggested policies will be set in any case, and can be set to support greater or fewer births.
1. There is no anti-baby senitment on the left (obviously untrue, in my personal experience!!), and/or
2. Any policy targeted at increasing births is overreaching. But the suggested policies will be set in any case, and can be set to support greater or fewer births.
Matt Bruenig blog on this:
mattbruenig.com/2023/03/05/e...
mattbruenig.com/2023/03/05/e...
April 16, 2025 at 12:24 AM
Matt Bruenig blog on this:
mattbruenig.com/2023/03/05/e...
mattbruenig.com/2023/03/05/e...
Oh I'm so silly I didn't even realize you made this! I thought you were just posting it. It's very cool
April 14, 2025 at 9:13 PM
Oh I'm so silly I didn't even realize you made this! I thought you were just posting it. It's very cool
I think it’s mostly a classic case of people getting mad at a headline and not reading the article, plus extreme unrelated Liz Bruenig hatred (which itself is hard to explain).
April 13, 2025 at 10:55 PM
I think it’s mostly a classic case of people getting mad at a headline and not reading the article, plus extreme unrelated Liz Bruenig hatred (which itself is hard to explain).
lol. For real though ? Any thoughts . I’m genuinely asking xx
April 13, 2025 at 10:46 PM
lol. For real though ? Any thoughts . I’m genuinely asking xx
What specifically do you see as the issue in this excerpt?
April 13, 2025 at 10:26 PM
What specifically do you see as the issue in this excerpt?
Where does she claim she is fine with this? I understood her as suggesting pretty tame social democratic policies to make having kids easier.
April 13, 2025 at 10:24 PM
Where does she claim she is fine with this? I understood her as suggesting pretty tame social democratic policies to make having kids easier.
It’s extremely unclear to me why this article makes everyone so angry. It portrays right wing pronatalists as freaks and suggests tame social democratic family policy as an alternative.
does anyone have a cannon pointed at the sun I can borrow? need to shoot myself into the sun with a cannon
April 13, 2025 at 10:21 PM
It’s extremely unclear to me why this article makes everyone so angry. It portrays right wing pronatalists as freaks and suggests tame social democratic family policy as an alternative.
What is everyone upset about here? Genuine question.
April 13, 2025 at 10:16 PM
What is everyone upset about here? Genuine question.