Juan José

"The logical conclusion of a technofeudal oligarchy combining forces with an authoritarian political movement is compulsory enrollment in the security state’s platform architecture of surveillance, indoctrination, and behavioral modification."

all the high level, most senior expert world leading computational linguists whose work i admire as scientists are absolutely united in thinking that ai is bullshit. i just think you should know that

It is the honor of my lifetime to share that @universitypress.cambridge.org will publish the @lingsocam.bsky.social's new Journal of Black Language & Culture. www.lsadc.org/content.asp?...

JBLAC fosters a transdisciplinary conversation on Black language & culture through a global, diasporic lens.

JA Westenberg @Daojoan@mastodon.social My 9 year old and his classmates have started using “that’s AI” to mean “I don’t believe you.” Me: we’re having dinosaur meat for dinner Kiddo: that’s AI Sep 24, 2025, 07:36 AM

They've lost the 9yos

Getting close to 50k views and I'm wondering is it just everybody is scared to say this and pleased I did? Because if there's so many of us who agree, trust me I'd know if 1k people disagreed with me let alone 50k, why are we letting AI ruin our universities?

Together we can turn back the tide.

Build your union, not your CV

‘Embrace the future’ means ‘do as I say’.

This is one of the absolute toughest things about predatory inclusion — the predation is often fun or a little useful. Criticism makes a reasonable person sound like an asshole. LowerEd weathered me for this kind of social death.

So I’ll say it: your enjoyment does not matter & should not matter.

I don’t have an exact wording yet, but what I’m aiming for is something like “As your teacher, I will not be using any AI tools for ___, therefore it is also my expectation that my students _____.” Followed with an explanation that the process of learning is the goal of our work together.

What It’s Like to Be a Student Who Hates ChatGPT “Everyone is using it”—almost everyone.

you've heard about the college kids who can't do anything without ChatGPT's help—but what about the students who oppose generative A.I. for myriad reasons and refuse to rely on it as a shortcut? well, I found and spoke with a few of them here: slate.com/life/2025/07...

If teachers/educators say, "hey, this is going too fast and it's harming kids," will they slow down? No.

If teachers/educators say, "hey, there needs to be way more guardrails and privacy restrictions," will they add them? No.

Stop gaslighting us into believing it's a real conversation.

"The goal of academic training is not to solve problems as efficiently and quickly as possible, but to develop skills for identifying and dealing with novel problems, which have never been solved before"

<- this open letter should be read by everyone in #HigherEd

openletter.earth/open-letter-...

If your peace requires silence about injustice, then it is not peace. It’s privilege.

I am in my mattress with my cash because this global crypto crime ring will break democratic institutions, steal whatever isn’t nailed down and buy all the water we will be working in the mines to buy after the company Apple Store takes its credits for the air we breathe.

Twenty years in education and I have seen so many things that were going to "save teachers time" and then it got weaponized into "if you don't use this, you're ruining your students' future" and usually when that mindless zealousness comes around it's less than a year for that tech to collapse.

Also getting REALLY tired of these "high-minded" philosophical arguments—particularly those lathered in as much condescension as this one—when in fact the "author" (I'm using that term very very lightly) is financially/professionally tied to AI's success.

GenAI bootlickers be like "Oh ChatGPT can do [thing]. We have to rethink the whole [thing] system".

How about we rethink the techbro oligarchy pushing this shit into our livelihoods and expecting US to adapt to IT!? Oh, sorry, is that too hard for you to think about? Thinking is hard, isn't it? 🙄

there are a lot of problems with this article and its sources, including the fact "10 times as much energy" is an estimate from *checks footnotes* the chairman of alphabet

but the biggest problem is that it asks bad questions and answers them with bad frames

Coloring sheet. Block letters in the middle of the page read “There’s no such thing as ‘lazy’ language.” The text is surrounded by illustrations of snails.

Completed coloring sheet. Block letters read "Every body has an accent," with one word on each line. A forearm palm up shows three tattoos in an homage to American traditional style: A rose; a horseshoe with '[ɡʊd lʌk' written on it, and a heart tattoo with a banner reading "[mɑm mam mʌm mɒm]]". In the space around the arm, a pair of hands meant to represent the ASL sign for "sign" and a mouth. The negative space is filled with stars.

Hey if you or your language and #linguistics students are looking for some end-of-term de-stressing, I put a couple more pages from my coloring book project up here: tinyurl.com/coloring-gre...

Coches parando para dejar cruzar a familias con críos. Gente no haciendo el cabra ante la falta de semáforos. Montones de personas en terrazas escuchando la radio. Críos jugando en el parque. Todo lo más, colas grandes para comprar el pan y algunos supermercados cerrados. Si, dimos la talla

Alt-Txt: Two people stand before multi-color strips of paper with text on them that stretch down an entire wall and onto the floor. The title of the installation "I Agree" appear in all caps on the wall, too.

Love this. In his “I Agree” installation Dima Yarovinsky-Yahel took the content from terms of service statements for companies like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, Tinder and printed them out on A4 paper with a standard font size for legal contracts to demonstrate the length of these agreements.

Will the Humanities Survive Artificial Intelligence? Maybe not as we’ve known them. But, in the ruins of the old curriculum, something vital is stirring.

Highly recommend this piece by D. Graham Burnett that really grapples with the fact that LLMs can produce an incredibly convincing simulation of human thought, but also why we can't treat the simulation as the same was what happens when humans think. www.newyorker.com/culture/the-...

Yesterday, I joined my brilliant colleagues at #AERA2025 for a panel, "AI and Educational Justice: A Critical Conversation." An audience member asked for more concrete ways to resist the imposition of AI on teachers/students - ahem, Trump's EO on AI - and I wanted to expand on my answer. 🧵

Then why cut $370 million from the budget of the CSU, @governor.ca.gov ? The California State University system teaches one in 10 Californians, including a double-digit percentage of first-gen college students! Why won’t the 4th largest economy in the world support public education? #CSUCuts

More in No, Other People:

New poll:

“America would be better off if more people worked in manufacturing.”

• 80% of Americans agree
• 20% disagree

“I would be better off if I worked in a factory.”

• 25% of Americans agree
• 73% disagree
• 2% currently work in a factory

Preamble All research at our institution, from ideation and execution to analysis and reporting, is bound by the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. This code specifies five core values that organise and inform research conduct: Honesty, Scrupulousness, Transparency, Independence and Responsibility. One way to summarise the guidelines in this document is to say they are about taking these core values seriously. When it comes to using Generative AI in or for research, the question is if and how this can be done honestly, scrupulously, transparently, independently, and responsibly. A key ethical challenge is that most current Generative AI undermines these values by design [3–5; details below]. Input data is legally questionable; output reproduces biases and erases authorship; fine-tuning involves exploitation; access is gated; versioning is opaque; and use taxes the environment. While most of these issues apply across societal spheres, there is something especially pernicious about text generators in academia, where writing is not merely an output format but a means of thinking, crediting, arguing, and structuring thoughts. Hollowing out these skills carries foundational risks. A common argument for Generative AI is a promise of higher productivity [5]. Yet productivity does not equal insight, and when kept unchecked it may hinder innovation and creativity [6, 7]. We do not need more papers, faster; we rather need more thoughtful, deep work, also known as slow science [8–10]. For these reasons, the first principle when it comes to Generative AI is to not use it unless you can do so honestly, scrupulously, transparently, independently and responsibly. The ubiquity of tools like ChatGPT is no reason to skimp on standards of research integrity; if anything, it requires more vigilance.

A year ago our faculty commissioned & adopted guidance on GenAI and research integrity. Preamble below, pdf at osf.io/preprints/os..., text also at ideophone.org/generative-a...

Key to these guidelines is a values-first rather than a technology-first approach, based on NL code of research conduct

The case for AI illiteracy Why not knowing might be an academic advantage

"The increasing encroachment of AI across the curriculum risks subsuming all forms of knowing into computational logics...To resist this flattening, we may need to hold fast to ways of knowing that cannot be modelled.AI illiteracy...is a defence of disciplinary identity" substack.com/inbox/post/1...

Incidentally also what corporations are trying to do to tech and creative work by shoving AI into everything

What is the dream evidential in Turkish