Quel monde pourri qui attend nos enfants.

Kind of hate that we have to ask the question in this headline!

I’ve been (link)blogging recently about needing to talk about epistemology when we talk about generative AI. I know that in at least one case, I’ve evoked the generation of scientific knowledge as a counterexample to the “just the facts, ma’am” naïve epistemology promoted by AI and its supporters. To use generative AI to review papers—and to try to get around peer review—feels particularly dangerous to me.

Quick question about this passage:

Trump … signed an executive order titled “Preventing Woke AI in the Federal Government,” directing government agencies “not to procure models that sacrifice truthfulness and accuracy to ideological agendas.”

So, how does one determine what is true or accurate? Once again, we need to talk about epistemology when we talk about generative AI.

Dammit, am I going to have to stop using Canvas?

“Traffic apocalypse” is a scary idea—not only for the threat it poses to smaller websites but also for the way it could further cement the influence of a few big companies in shaping the world.

This emphasis on “objective truth” further underscores the need to talk epistemology when we talk AI.

Je n’aime pas du tout la présence des IA dans les écoles, mais je trouve aussi gênante la pénalisation à tort des étudiants.

You know, I skipped over this story when it come out in a couple of other outlets, but seeing the headline again here got me thinking about how good/scary of an example this is of LLMs shaping (rather than reflecting) reality.

This sounds fine.

Some wild details in here—all of which seem more important to me than the application details.

Some horrifying details in here.

Personally, I’m not sure why anyone needs to be this rich.

Je trouve utile de lire les médias étrangers, pour savoir comment on réagit à notre folie.

Vive la Suisse et sa résistance envers Amazon.

This is a depressing read but an important one.

Good article. I’m not here to defend CEOs who have affairs with executives in their companies, but the tech ecosystem that allowed for this will do more harm to everyday people than it will ever hold CEOs to account.

Yes, but AI will also save us time writing emails, so this seems like a fair tradeoff.

As a committed em dash user, this has been bugging me since I heard about it.

Le décryptage des communautés en ligne a toujour été un genre important des recherches, mais c’est surtout important dans des cas comme celui-ci.

I can see the value in some state guidelines, but I suspect they would be more permissive than what I want for my classroom. I hope I’ll still have the chance to establish restrictions as I see fit.

Musk leans into the bro in tech bro.

So far, we’ve been told that the General Assembly’s war on DEI doesn’t affect our classroom teaching. Is this legislative bluster, or do we have worries on the horizon?

Gonna keep posting (almost) every article I read on NCII and generative AI.

This line (from a study quoted in the article) stood out:

The open-source nature of TTI technologies, proclaimed as a democratizing force in generative AI, has also enabled the propagation of models that perpetuate hypersexualized imagery and nonconsensual deepfakes.

Open sourcing generative AI solves some problems but creates others.

On, look, it’s two of my least favorite things about generative AI (NCII and raking in money without concern for ethics) IN THE SAME STORY.