reblogging shit that inspires joy

Let’s fucking go

5. If the words are Google's, this solidifies the position of universities who demand that all answers from AI are fully cited. If all the in-line citations now have to be (Google, 2026), that's going to make it obvious when someone's trying to use Google as a source. There's still the difficulty with people who are academically dishonest by trying to pass off the AI writing as their own. 6. 91% accuracy is officially too low to use as a source of references, which means the AI can't be used as a source of references either. This makes it less legitimate for such purposes than Wikipedia of all places (Wikipedia might need date/time proof of when it was accessed for the reference to be valid, but at least it is possible to prove the link existed at a particular date and time). 7. This will help encourage the rollout of courses on how to avoid AI search for students who need academic accuracy, because it's statistically not good enough to use. 8. This strengthens the case intellectual property authors have against Google in the EU, as this is proof that an intellectual property transfer took place.

Please note that in Germany, liability is on the publisher, not the author. So this does not make any statements about whether AI is legally considered author of it's statements.

Someone should remake that image, but with @the-rains-of-castamere's new user.

I need context. What popper are they referring to? Why are they referring to the act associated with the "popper" as popping. The only context I can imagine is immensely kinky. Clear this up, I beg of you.

SEIS fag sex? En esta economia?

This is the most important addition to the sandwich discourse I have ever read.

“don’t take it personally” how would you like me to take it then? professionally? romantically? academically?