One of the greatest theoretical minds of the European socialist movement and the author of numerous classic works, Rosa Luxemburg, was murdered on this day in 1919.

We're offering 30% all works on or by the great revolutionary and theorist.

There is a crisis of impunity. The Musk/Grok stuff is just one f many examples of people who are counting on there never being any consequences. And it all makes me just incandescently mad.

You’re not imagining things—the plums that were in your icebox are *completely gone*. Here’s why that’s bad news:

• They were *your plums*, that you were saving for breakfast. That makes this personal for you.

• They were *sweet*, so whoever ate them *enjoyed* them. That’s unforgivable.

We’re touching stove, and frankly, we’re going to be touching a lot more than just stove very soon. We love burner, don’t we? Should I touch it? They don’t think I should touch it. I’m going to touch it folks.

WHAT

It’s true that there’s something called an LLM that is somehow involved with this feature much like it’s true that there’s something called a Linked List that is somehow involved with a thread, but that’s none of our business! All that matters is what the feature does!

“explain how” who gives a shit? What do you want a Lunch n’ Learn? Just tell them to turn it off!

It is a mistake to call it “Grok’s activity”. It’s X’s activity.

With all due respect to the Hindustan Times, why are they covering this better than their New York counterparts?

Tangential to the much more important point but this is why I am bearish on LLMs-as-customer-service agents and such. They know what they’re supposed to say but it’s all lies. If you could get them to actually do what they say then you might have something but that’s drawing the rest of the owl.

I think the AI angle of this is obscurant. It doesn’t matter that grok is “an AI” whatever you take that to mean. Suppose X hired a team of guys to photoshop the clothes off of women and children whenever anyone asks. That’s functionally identical what happening here. It’s not complicated.

I don’t think that ChatGPT is turning people into murderers or inducing psychosis per se but I do think that LLMs have straightforward non-mystical properties which make them very attractive and potentially dangerous in some ways for people with obsessive or psychotic tendencies.

To anyone who says this wasn’t predictable

I’m a bit confused why the New York Times hasn’t written a word about this yet