“Bluesky may support a more interpretive, reflective mode of science communication.”
“Interactions on Bluesky were an order of magnitude higher than on X.”
“Bluesky may well become the next X for scientific discussion and will persist in the long term.”

I was putting together a PowerPoint slide with the headlines of major cyber incidents in our region from just the past two months, and I’ve already run out of space.

This is a much more objective, and sobering, assessment of the impact and risks...
www.theregister.com/2025/08/21/o...

The criticism of Orange for downplaying the risks of its incident, as noted in the article, is striking - especially since Orange also sells cybersecurity services to others. Hard to square that with the transparency, containment and mitigation NIS2 is supposed to drive.

It's a stochastic parrot. But this may challenge us to rethink what understanding really implies. If a purely statistical model consistently produces coherent, useful, context-aware answers… at what point do we just treat that (at least functionally) as understanding? And does it not have value?

Fact is, LLMs learn only by predicting the next word—yet (some) reasoning and abstraction emerge. Maybe that’s a clue: language isn’t just a tool for thought, but a big part of how we perceive (and structure) the world. Not the whole story, but maybe more central than we guessed?

I had the Courier in those days... still remember flashing it to support X2 and getting the amazing 56k throughput (which was "almost as much as a digital 64k line!"). With the iconic "oink-oink" handshake noises at the start of each session...

That may sound blunt, but given the ongoing instability, it’s clear MITRE’s reliability as a cornerstone partner is compromised. That doesn’t mean they’ve lost all relevance, but sole dependence on MITRE for stewardship of key frameworks has now become risky.

We're closer to anthropomorphic misinterpretations than to Rise of the Machines.

Carnegie-Mellon research seems to confirm: LLMs often fail at long-horizon reasoning, social interactions, and tasks requiring genuine understanding. They perform noticeably better when tasks align with their training data, not when abstract or novel reasoning is required. arxiv.org/pdf/2412.14161

It does have one great feature though - it'll still have security patches after October 14, 2025.

Nothing new here. The real value of AI is in augmenting humans, not replacing them. LLMs require a human in the loop and verified tracebacks to be reliable — and that takes significant manual effort. No automated method today can guarantee accuracy in high-stakes use.

Het is niet zozeer een vlaag van zinsverbijstering maar eerder de toepassing van de wettelijke vereisten in de Codex Hoger Onderwijs, waarbij de instelling zich ook aan controle mag verwachten, en niemand gebaat is met complicaties. Zie o.a. www.ugent.be/nl/jobs/taal...