Elmo

YouTube video by jackbomb 10 Hours Ambient Drone - The Eccy road Co-op freezer Symphony (Sheffield, UK)

he could fix me [the freezer at the Sheffield co-op]: www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3Hb...

Ah, yes, the Mellon Foundation!

okay but can you tell us the details?

Just edited the wikipedia page for probability axioms, wish me luck!

people love saying "we're moving past capitalism, into a system dominated by the relentless drive to accumulate capital". they can't get enough of it. they won't stop.

we are not doing the fucking Sokal Hoax/Science Wars Again But With LLMs This Time. i fucking refuse.

structurally indifferent to truth is a good line

🙏

There is zero reason anyone should care about what tech execs tell their kids, no matter what the content is. Even if it was good advice for mega rich kids (and there's no reason to think the execs are good at giving this advice), it wouldn't apply to normal people.

luckily all the main metaethical views can be seamlessly exchanged into each other, as well as a stablecoin pegged to the daily vibes of one particular middle aged guy who has tenure at an undisclosed college on the Eastern Seaboard.

Xfinity is maybe the worst company ever. They proactively send me links to information I did not even ask for and the links 404! Truly next level incompetence.

> Another of al-Jazari’s fantastical contraptions is of special interest to historians of science as it is regarded by many to be the first programmable “robot” in history.

www.nationalgeographic.com/history/hist...

Is there a comparison website that I can use to choose service providers based on who relies least on dysfunctional chatbots?

I'm updating my deck so it includes a "repeated prisoner's dilemma" combo.

Among all the critiques of academic publishing, I don't see enough talk about how top journals (The Lancet, Science) make false claims about the research they publish to drum up hype. It's so sad. Two examples: bsky.app/profile/pwgt... and www.science.org/content/arti...

Perfectly teachable example of the Clever Hans effect! Thank you for this write-up.

on the syllabus it goes!

Many academics (perhaps especially anglophone philosophers) prefer paraphrase and summary with few direct quotations when relaying the claims of others. Maybe that often sounds better, but I think it's strictly inferior as support for your own claims. Including the receipts also helps the reader.

I'm a cognitive scientist with an interest in epistemic vigilance, and this essay that's been going around gave me pause.

I don't think it's straightforward to apply the concept of epistemic vigilance to interactions with LLMs, as this essay does.

🧵/

sbgeoaiphd.github.io/rotating_the...

Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research - Nature The proliferation of artificial intelligence tools in scientific research risks creating illusions of understanding, where scientists believe they understand more about the world than they actual...

More broadly, the essay is a great example of the "illusion of understanding" that @lmesseri.bsky.social and I warned in 2024 would be a risk of using LLMs, especially as they become more capable

17/

www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Postdoc opportunity at the Taft Research Center here at the University of Cincinnati for which philosophers are eligible to apply. See here for details and to apply: jobs.uc.edu/job/Taft-Pos...

There are also academics who frame the task of AI ethics as "making sure that the benefits of AI can be realized while minimizing harms"... no? The claim that any particular tech should exist needs to be the end point of an ethical inquiry, not the starting point! It's not a forgone conclusion...

Fantastic, I'll send you an email!

love when the job posting contains multiple pieces of wrong information about how and where to apply...

not gonna post it in case they search their own name and also I could be wrong

Found an interesting paper but suspected AI slop, then I found out the author has 20+ papers in 2025, including a retraction notice for irrelevant citations, and funnily enough multiple papers on "AI slop", including a taxonomy...

I'm slowly getting a feel for what AI-generated academic papers sound like, so far I think the clearest indicator is that they feel superficial (many connections to existing work are claimed but never explained) and the paragraph-to-paragraph structure of sections is a little directionless.

iambic tetrameter ass stick

what was the code like?

Would be cool to play this with a (bespoke?) 540 card Dominaria cube.