Sherlock Holmes
@slevinsky.bsky.social
Has Google fixed its article summary AI to avoid discussing any negative coverage of AI? This summary entirely ignores the emphasis and sentiment of linked article. @eff.org @fightforthefuture.org
www.cnn.com/2025/12/11/m...
www.cnn.com/2025/12/11/m...
December 11, 2025 at 8:42 PM
Has Google fixed its article summary AI to avoid discussing any negative coverage of AI? This summary entirely ignores the emphasis and sentiment of linked article. @eff.org @fightforthefuture.org
www.cnn.com/2025/12/11/m...
www.cnn.com/2025/12/11/m...
![Screenshot from Axios article:
Thursday afternoon that leadership "doesn't think [the speech] will be long at this point."
Zoom in: Instead of trying to hold up the bill, Democrats see the most productive strategy as continuing to force Republicans to block their efforts to bring up bills forcing the Justice Department to release the Jeffrey Epstein files.
"Democrats have succeeded in tying the House GOP in knots over Epstein files amendments," a Democratic leadership aide told Axios.
"It's lunacy to wring our hands over a statutory deadline that the administration will simply ignore when we've been able to send the Republicans into utter chaos," the aide said.
Zoom out: Jeffries will have to contend with expectations from his grassroots base, which are sometimes untethered to the reality of congressional procedure.
Some Democrats said those expectations alone may be reason enough for Jeffries to deliver a long speech.
"I think it's smart, I think he should do it. People like it. People liked the last one," Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-Va.) told Axios.
Yes, but: Members "would be really unhappy," if Jeffries gave a long speech "after what he did on July 4," a third House Democrat said on the condition of anonymity.
Some lawmakers were frustrated that Jeffries spoke for nearly nine hours after his team maintained he would only go for about one, forcing them to scramble to reschedule flights ahead of the July 4 recess.
"The base doesn't even give a s*** about this. The rescissions thing is not on their radar," the lawmaker added, arguing that if the grassroots does take notice of it, "they'll forget about it two days later and be like, 'What's next.'"
"You can't feed that beast," they said](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:xqfuimxhoynxbbfyxvxxcpat/bafkreie35qmonq6jmdl6bd57cjql62lmiajnbridnyhewp2eib4i4inm7y@jpeg)
I'm not here for this next level of enshitification.
1) G kills off the sparse remaining traffic it drives to publishers by forcing its AI slop offering onto users
2) G offers to embed its AI onto publishers' websites to optimally harass readers to extract max $$$
techcrunch.com/2025/06/26/a...
1) G kills off the sparse remaining traffic it drives to publishers by forcing its AI slop offering onto users
2) G offers to embed its AI onto publishers' websites to optimally harass readers to extract max $$$
techcrunch.com/2025/06/26/a...
June 28, 2025 at 4:40 AM
I'm not here for this next level of enshitification.
1) G kills off the sparse remaining traffic it drives to publishers by forcing its AI slop offering onto users
2) G offers to embed its AI onto publishers' websites to optimally harass readers to extract max $$$
techcrunch.com/2025/06/26/a...
1) G kills off the sparse remaining traffic it drives to publishers by forcing its AI slop offering onto users
2) G offers to embed its AI onto publishers' websites to optimally harass readers to extract max $$$
techcrunch.com/2025/06/26/a...
June 27, 2025 at 11:15 PM
weird, I thought Congress had a say in the matter 🤔
June 19, 2025 at 7:54 PM
weird, I thought Congress had a say in the matter 🤔
what kind of bullshit hedge headline is this??? this is a meaningless collection of words
June 18, 2025 at 5:43 PM
what kind of bullshit hedge headline is this??? this is a meaningless collection of words
It plainly references existing law.
June 16, 2025 at 8:00 PM
It plainly references existing law.
