I’m glad this article points out how much unpaid work mods do to make Reddit a place people want to go. They arguably add more value to the platform than employees do, and this strikes me as a bad move.

Feels pretty sleazy to me.

I get that any platform has to pay its bills, but Huffman keeps coming off as a real jerk.

Keep it up, subreddits!

What I appreciate about coverage of this from The Verge and Techdirt is the way that it draws attention to questions of digital labor.

Good for them. Let’s hope it makes a difference.

Good reflecton here. I’d been wondering if Apple’s Journal app would hold up to Day One, but I was never inclined to betray Day One, and I do NOT like the idea of algorithmic journaling.

This is a real shame.

Last paragraph here is an important one: I’ve seen a lot of headlines about OpenAI calling for regulation, but it’s noteworthy that it’s hypothetical future regulation.

Using AI for customer service is the stuff of my nightmares.

Some good comments in here—especially on how AI enforces and normalizes certain kinds of writing instead of allowing us to determine what writing should look like.

To paraphrase Mike Masnick, the defining motto of the Musk era seems to be ‘it can always get more stupid.’

How does this acquisition continue to get dumber and dumber?

I had never thought of a car as a creepy surveillance device, but this is horrifying.

Fascinating read—and one that reminds me that academic journal software doesn’t always render emoji either, which is a problem for social media research.

Rand Paul is very often wrong, but I always appreciate when he comes through.

Very interesting! I know some critics will describe this as a morally panicked response, but I disagree. I think it’s smart to ask how AI will affect human creators and for companies/communities like Paizo to take principled stances.

Content moderation is hard, and moderating AI content definitely seems harder to me. However, so long as OpenAI has control over ChatGPT (and benefits from others’ use of it), I do think it has a responsibility to shape what it can produce. That said, there remains a deeper, legitimate question about how much influence a single company should have over LLM output.

This is just so petty. I don’t know how his leadership at Twitter is defensible anymore.

Every time I think this acquisition can’t get dumber, it does.

I presume this decisuon also cuts off academics; this is going to have a huge impact on research, and not in a good way. I’m glad I’ve pivoted to other platforms, but this is still infuriating.

Why… why don’t we better anticipate better misuses like this? Are technological “progress” and market opportunities more important than these side effects?

A couple of months ago, I spoke to Education Week about the Gas app. I thought it had an exploitative business model then, and its being acquired does nothing to calm that fear.

Ah, the kind of answer that only raises more questions.

Fascinating read on potential threats posed by AI—and potential solutions.