Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I mean......this is one of the most well-known ways AI fucks up! It makes shit up! It hallucinates! That's a big reason why it shouldn't be seen as acceptable to just read AI summaries instead of actually reading the sources themselves, because you can't trust whatever the AI shits back out at you. And the bluesky poster is what gets me, like, people go "oh well that's why you have to check AI in your research!" There's still option B: do this kind of research the way everyone did it up until 20-fucking-23 and don't use Claude or ShitGPT.
More takes from the replies:
(this last one gets down to so much AI discourse lmao)
The stupidest imaginable excuses for surveillance pricing
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
With "surveillance pricing," businesses have finally found something AI can do way, way, way better than people: price gouging.
As the name suggests, "surveillance pricing" is the practice of charging every customer a different price for every transaction, based on the massive surveillance dossiers that Big Tech companies and data-brokers have assembled on everyone in the world. Congress hasn't updated federal consumer privacy law since 1988 (when they passed a law banning the disclosure of VHS rentals), so pretty much any form of consumer surveillance is fair game.
This is where the AI comes in. One thing AI is indisputably great for is multivariate statistical analysis. You can feed an AI "behavioral data" (information about where you go, what you do, what you buy, who you talk to and what you say) about all of your customers and ask it to cluster them according to their shared traits. Then you can direct the AI to automatically run a series of small experiments to discover the maximum markup each group will stomach under which circumstances.
This works without you having to direct the AI to rip off certain groups of people – it will simply find the most vulnerable people and rip them off the most. If you're hiring in an industry that practices a lot of tacit racial discrimination, a system like this can figure out on its own that people of color typically accept lower wages because there are fewer employers bidding for their labor, and recommend lowball salary offers, all without you ever typing "please be racist" into your AI prompt.
This works so well that Google has announced that it is their plan for making a profit off of AI, after losing hundreds of billions of dollars on chatbots:
In the before times, marketers and demographers had to dream up demographic categories based on limited data and run focus groups to figure out how to maximize revenue from each market segment. Now an AI can segment the data to any degree you choose, and continuously, automatically experiment on each segment to find their weak spots.
It's "theory-free." You don't have to discover why a group is willing to pay more under a given set of circumstances, you merely have to observe and weaponize this fact. You don't have to know why one group of purchasers consistently accept higher prices between 6AM and 8AM – you can just automatically jack up prices on them without knowing or caring that you're gouging parents of young children who are re-ordering essential supplies while trying to get their kids to school in the morning.
I thought up that example. I don't know if it's really happening. But here's something that really is happening: ecommerce sites charge parents of newborns extra when they order thermometers in the middle of the night. I'm not saying that anyone ever sat down and said, "Parents with sick children will pay whatever we charge for a thermometer at 2AM." They didn't have to: this is the kind of thing an automated system can do without any human intervention:
The goal of surveillance pricing is to shift all the "consumer surplus" (the difference between the highest price you're willing to pay and the price you actually pay) to companies. It's a form of cod-Marxism where you are gouged according to your ability (to pay) and charged according to the desperation of your need:
The problems of surveillance pricing are well documented. Under Biden, the FTC did a landmark study on the practice, developing a rich factual record that documents the role surveillance pricing plays in the affordability crisis:
Companies are already using this technology to rip you off, and they're slavering for the chance to do more of it. Instacart was recently caught marking up some shoppers' items by as much as a third:
The problem is that as much as companies love this, shoppers hate it. Last summer, Delta announced that it was going to surveillance price every seat on every flight, only to face such a massive backlash that they had to make another announcement bemoaning the fact that we'd all misunderstood their (unambiguous and extremely damning) announcement and they were actually going to do no such thing:
One thing the Mamdani campaign impressed upon every politician in the country is that people are pissed about affordability and they will support anyone who stands up for the public against AI-equipped price gougers. The problem of course is that those price gougers are highly organized and have deep treasuries (stuffed with money they stole from us). With surveillance pricing, politicians face a familiar conundrum: if they do the thing that's popular with voters, they'll enrage donors.
One way to cut this knot is to enact legislation that seems to address the problem, but stuff it with so many loopholes that it does nothing. This lets you declare yourself the people's champion without doing anything to protect them from the donors who prey on your voters. That's the approach they took in Maryland:
But in California, they're actually doing something about surveillance pricing. AB-2564 is a smart, well-written bill that bans surveillance pricing. It contains an easily evaluated test for surveillance pricing and carves out legitimate reasons for offering different prices for the same purchase (for example, when it costs more to deliver the product or service):
Now we're in for the hard yards of turning this bill into a law. That's where California's cities come in. When municipal governments pass resolutions supporting a state bill, it makes it much easier to get that bill through the state legislature (and conversely, without support from major cities, it's that much easier to kill the bill before it becomes law).
A few days ago, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors was on the verge of passing a resolution in support of AB-2564. Now, that vote is stalled, thanks to a letter sent by the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, an organization that has been pissing in San Franciscans' faces and telling them it was raining since 1850:
The Chamber's letter is – to use a technical term – flaming garbage. It raises the most spurious objections imaginable, claims about the bill's language that are belied by its plain, easily understood text. These objections are demolished in a letter the Electronic Frontier Foundation sent to the Supervisors:
In the letter, EFF explains that claims that surveillance pricing will lower prices are overblown and not borne out by evidence. But more importantly – as EFF points out – privacy is a human right, and the idea that you should have to give up your privacy to get a fair price is just a fancy way of saying that privacy should be the exclusive preserve of people who can afford to pay more:
EFF's letter goes on to address the Chamber's objections. Far from creating uncertainty about which conduct the bill addresses, AB-2564 crisply defines surveillance pricing as:
a customized price for a good for a specific consumer or group of consumers based, in whole or in part, on personally identifiable information collected through electronic surveillance.
The Chamber raises other tired objections, falsely claiming that banning surveillance pricing will end common discounting strategies like offering seniors cheaper movie tickets, or giving cheaper rates to retain customers who call to cancel their service. EFF replies by pointing out that all the Chamber's concerns are covered by the three comprehensive carve-outs in the bill: the ability to charge higher rates when it costs more to service a given customer; offering discounts to retain customers who want to cancel their service; and finally, discounts for criteria anyone can meet (like an "early bird special"), for membership in a broadly defined group (like "seniors"), or for participation in a loyalty program.
The San Francisco Supervisors could have figured out at a glance that the Chamber was bullshitting them. All it takes is a cursory read of the statute. But now they don't even have to do that: EFF has painstakingly debullshittified the Chamber's FUD.
Surveillance pricing is grossly offensive. When a company charges me $0.50 for a product that it charges you $1 for, they're essentially saying that your dollars are worth half as much as mine are. Companies shouldn't be able to reach into your wallet or your bank account and chop your money in half:
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
If you had been in my kitchen tonight, you would have heard me tenderly whisper, "My lovely knife. My lovely knife," to my Victorinox chef's knife after I finished using it. It occurred to me afterward that maybe that was a little weird... 😂
But LISTEN! I have only sharpened that knife maybe. MAYBE Once. in the entire 18 years I've had it! And it's still a DREAM to use! (I was cutting a tomato tonight, and it's JUST getting to the point where, yeah, it could probably use being sharpened sometime, because it doesn't slice through tomatoes PERFECTLY anymore... But... It's still great enough to make me want to whisper "My lovely knife." 😂)
me when i'm a 9th century viking getting on a ship to go raid the latest coastal anglo-saxon monastery as a part of the Great Heathen Army which has already committed untold violence and bloodshed but i am safe in the knowledge that in 1200 years, i will be cast as some kind of victim of christianity even though i converted entirely of my own volition on my deathbed in Fuck Ass Shropshire being prayed over by Æthelstan the local deacon whose monastic order was almost entirely decimated by myself only a decade earlier.
the thing about being bullied for being weird as a kid is that even if you've always embraced being weird your brain is still always looking for the line where it's too much. you can be as proudly and intentionally weird as you want and you can love being weird but your mind is still convinced there's a point where you get too weird and people start treating you like a weird looking bug again. also it feels like you reach that point 500 times a day even if everyone you've spoken to today found you pleasant and likable and even if you're completely alone in your house with nobody looking at you at all.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Les Modes parisiennes, no. 232, 8 août 1847, Paris. Modes de Mme Bidault, boulevert des Capucines, 7. Fleurs de Millery, élève de Battou, r. de Ménars, 12. Robes de Mme Marie, r. de Hanouve, 5. Soierie et barége de la Mon des deux Pages, r. Vivienne, 11. Bijoux de Darche, passage des Panoramas, 55. Gants Mayer, rue de la Paix, 26. Corsets Josselin, rue de la Paix, 13. Bibliothèque nationale de France
Bonnet de dentelle orné de fleurs et de rubans. — Robe de mousseline de coton imprimée, garnie de volants festonnés, chacun d'eux festonné en coton d'une des nuances de la robe.
Le corsage est décolleté et froncé. Un ruban est noué autour du col.
Capote de tulle à coulisses couverts de satin couleur capucine et ornée d'une touffe de capucines. — Redingote de taffetas blanc fermée devant par des nœuds de ruban de satin dont les bouts sont ferrés par des aiguillettes d'argent. Les jockeys des manches sont formés avec des coques de rubans à Louis XIV avec des bouts ferrés d'aiguillettes.
—
Lace cap adorned with flowers and ribbons. — Printed cotton muslin dress trimmed with scalloped ruffles, each edged in cotton thread matching one of the dress's shades.
The bodice is low-cut and gathered. A ribbon is tied around the neckline.
Tulle bonnet featuring casings covered in nasturtium-colored satin and adorned with a cluster of nasturtiums. — White taffeta coat-dress fastened at the front with satin ribbon bows, the ends tipped with silver aglets. The sleeve caps are formed from ribbon loops in the Louis XIV style, also finished with aglet-tipped ends.
Breaking news! Supporting characters in media are there to support the main character’s story and journey, and are sometimes not the most fleshed out and eventual characters in the media and make choices that are primarily in the service of advancing the plot for the protagonist!
I can’t remember if I shared this list on here before but this is a list that I have on my letterboxd and I would love to add some more films since I only have 19 films on it currently
I think the list might be a bit heavy on the rom com side. There would definitely be more alt titles featuring counterculture of different kinds.
My suggestions are Dazed and confused, Stand by me, Boogie Nights, something by Tarantino, Woodstock (the documentary), Sid and Nancy, The Doors, The Wall, Full metal jacket and others by Kubrik, probably something by Lynch, True Romance, Natural born killers… that kinda stuff.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
In June, I had the first real hurdle in my relationship. I won't go into the details, but I was on a narcolepsy medication that makes people more prone to addictive behaviors. It did so with me.
During this time, my closest friend was extremely busy with work, I couldn't afford therapy because I was struggling to even make rent, and I didn't have someone I could talk to.
I have OCD. One of my compulsions is "checking" and it often takes the form of googling. Googling a word I know just to check that the definition hasn't changed. Googling whether xyz is normal. Googling how to choose some relatively unimportant things.
I googled all kinds of things. I googled to find out if there's a word for intentionally letting someone hear you cry in hopes that they'll comfort you. (Not because I was doing that, but because I had an overwhelming urge to.) I googled odds of relationship survival after addiction. I googled how to tell if your partner has stopped loving you.
And Google ai overview answered every single question. And on mobile, when I was curled up in the dark at 4am, there's a convenient text box to ask the AI a follow-up question. And the AI says things like "that's a hard situation to be in" and "that must be painful to hear"
And I'm not a fucking idiot. I know perfectly well that AI is trained to be sycophantic and that talking to a fucking LLM about my relationship fears was a massive mistake.
I was also terrified, alone, heartbroken, and desperate.
I spent literally hours of time googling questions on AI mode. Holding conversations with the AI. I have stickers on my laptop and water bottle that say "AI Hater Club" and "generative AI? Nein danke" and I wish Sam altman would fall off the face off the earth.
And none of that mattered. I was desperate. I recognized that, and once things began to calm down (my doctor took me off of the narcolepsy med and put me on a medication for addiction called Naltrexone, I was able to start therapy again, my partner and I worked together and took steps to repair what was damaged) I stopped turning to it for an open shoulder.
But I realized a few days ago that I hadn't stopped using the ai entirely. I would Google "best [item] on a budget" and instead of reading a cnet link that reviewed multiple brands, instead of checking consumer reports, I expanded the AI overview and asked follow-up questions.
I'm currently finishing up an astrophysics internship for the summer. Usually when I don't know how to code something, I look at the documentation or find a post on Reddit or stack overflow to explain. Instead, I was asking Google overview for instructions on how to use sys.argv. At no point was I vibe coding, but I was basically asking Google ai to walk me through it like a tutor.
And then, last week, I realized that I no longer Google things the same way. I used to search like "pokemon sun and moon original release date" but lately I've been searching "what year did pokemon sun and moon come out?" Even my checking OCD has changed. I used to Google "n30i mask cleaning +seal +oily" and now I Google "I use a resmed n30i CPAP mask and it keeps losing its seal when I'm trying to sleep. My face gets kind of greasy when I have it on. I already clean it with CPAP wipes every day and run it under water to rinse, do I need a different kind of mask?"
A few days ago, the news about Hank Green using LLMs to find research papers dropped, and I saw his response on Reddit. I saw the way he talked about the dopamine hit he got from it. And something clicked.
I had to install a different OS launcher on my phone so I could change the search bar widget to Firefox search instead of Google, because that's the only way to ensure I don't get the ai overview when I Google something. It's actually really frustrating because I instinctively search in long rambling questions, which does not work well. But I'm having a hard time going back to how I was.
People who suffer from AI addiction are not idiots, we aren't moral failures, we aren't traitors. We are victims of a predatory system and we need support, not smug superiority aimed in our direction.
Reblogging myself to add that when I first started this post, I was so afraid of the backlash that I was writing the post about my "friend" who came to this realization. Because y'all are fucking disgusting with how you treat people who aren't pure and untainted by the sin of using LLMs.
I hope you don't mind me adding your tags. They say what I'm thinking in a much less angry way.
#thank you OP for sharing this story #i have been really bothered by some of the ways people are talking about hank green and this sums it up well #there's a lot of talk about how 'being busy / stressed / neurodivergent isn't an excuse' #but he's not using it as one #he's not like. expecting immediate forgiveness #he's saying that he's realized his relationship to AI tools and his work in general is unhealthy and he's going to rethink it #and it really bothers me how little sympathy i've seen some people have for that #you can absolutely be disappointed—we expect better from a public figure with his values #(and as he's said his loved ones also expect better from him and so does he) #but we can't treat people who confess to having an unhealthy relationship with AI the same as AI sycophants #those are not even slightly the same thing #OP i'm sorry you've dealt with addictive AI behavior and i'm glad you're doing better now #and that Hank Green's situation has helped you recognize and mitigate the patterns you were still stuck in #i'm sorry for how the rhetoric about him must feel like it reflects on how people think of you #as a fellow AI hater we AI haters need to get rid of this idea that using AI ever makes you tainted and morally suspect forever #it helps no one and does so much harm
If I lived 200 years ago and I'd never seen a living platypus, only taxidermied specimens and drawings, and you told me that someone had just glued a duck's bill onto the body of a beaver (like other made-up hoax "discoveries" like the Fiji Mermaid and the Jackalope) and faked it? You know, I'd probably believe that. That absolutely sounds like the most reasonable explanation.
And yet I'd be wrong, because it actually exists. What the heck.
I wonder as I wander... @stellaluna33 - Tumblr Blog | Tumlook
pixelskylines
prguitarman
vaporwave
yousharknotpass
