take these tags, on somebody else's post (condolences pip)

the thing is. this is what i would call an inside thought. nobody would have known you didn't get it if you didn't tell them that. if you recognised that it was important but didn't have the headspace to process it, you can reblog without commentary for others, or to come back to later. or you can save it somewhere and wait until you DO have the capacity to read it over a few more times, ponder it, consider what it might mean, figure out how to understand it, and THEN reblog it

but no. rushing to reblog while it is still opaque. rushing to admit to ignorance rather than spend the time to achieve understanding. perhaps hoping that somebody will break it down for you more simply, though to my mind it was quite simply phrased in the first place. never stopping to take the time first

comprehension is not always instant! sometimes it takes a bit of time for something to percolate after you read it; sometimes you need to read it a few times; sometimes you realise you don't have the context for it and either go and get the context or accept that it's not for you right now

remember everyone...

thursday watch: the conditions for thursday are here, but a thursday incident has not yet been confirmed

So you basically have to make a choice between

a) working somewhere quiet and boiling hot

Or

b) working somewhere comfortable but loud and busy

Anything branded "AI" is automatically grift-adjacent. "Artificial intelligence" is a non specific term which truly means nothing. It can apply to basic statistical models, massive natural language models, image processing models, to prediction or categorization or input-output models. It's just completely non specific in a way that makes it useless. If something is called "AI" the first question should be "No but what is it actually? What math are you actually doing?"

Chatbot style input-output LLMs appear to be uniquely horrible for the human brain. We are very bad at interacting with something in natural language (even very broken natural language) and not projecting human intelligence on it. This is well know as the ELIZA effect and it appears to be pretty hard coded into human cognition. Humans have a strong tendency to hand over their critical thinking to these tools in a process known as cognitive offloading. This alone makes me believe that chat interfaces should be effectively banned from consumer facing products, and question if they have any use anywhere. It's unclear if this effect is unique to the chat interface or inherent to natural language models of all kinds, but regardless we should not be rolling these tools out in schools until we know.

"AI" companies have essentially exclusively behaved badly. They kicked off their products with the largest scale theft of intellectual property in history, one that's unlikely to ever be prosecuted. They peddle their products as tools to help people cheat, lie, and grift. They openly valorize men who say truly despicable things (one, two, three to start). They're rotting the US economy and betting the entire house on rolling snake eyes. They're using underhanded tactics to get their products into businesses and schools, and to spam their polluting energy hungry data centers across the globe. They're categorically untrustworthy.