“If you want us to adopt your technology into our pipelines, you’re going to have to meet us on our terms.”

Sociotechnical fictions are thus defined as mediated forms of imagination (...) Often unrecognised as fiction, they are deeply entangled with rational and instrumental practices, connecting the anticipatory dimension of technology with its legitimacy.

"It is, in a way, the aesthetic equivalent to an MCP server. It’s not a coincidence that there are no consumer tech companies that have adopted paperclip-punk visuals. It’s a style that prioritizes human-to-machine over human-to-human interaction."

A compelling collection of examples showing how technology is reshaping ancient faiths

"Conocemos esta cita histórica de Audre Lorde, que es importante en estas discusiones: las herramientas del amo nunca van a desmantelar la casa del amo. Me parece que podríamos poner esto a discusión."

www.centroculturadigital.mx/revista/tequ...

"Unlike main characters who respond to command, NPCs respond to stimuli, reclaiming agency from within its glaring limitations. However deluded by free will, playable characters cannot divorce from their preordained missions and milestones; their story is all but written..."

As Ballard said, fiction does not exactly predict or influence reality, but invents it by participating in it

Thousands of people are claiming that ChatGPT is sentient and that the AI is a type of all knowing God 🫠

youtu.be/zKCynxiV_8I?...

This has always been my real concern about AI—not that it is actually capable of replacing humans in most cases, but rather that the popular perception that it is will cause a huge amount of short term harm.

McLuhan said: “We shape our tools and, thereafter, our tools shape us.” This can be understood as an equally reciprocal relationship, but I don’t think that’s the case. What happens when technology shapes us more than we shape it? What happens when we have more influence in shaping technology?