It feels many only know my work pushing back against AI, which is very fair — but I have a broader research interest, which also forms a protective belt against such forces, as well as being what I have been thinking about since discovering "cognitive science" in ~2006: 🍃 metatheory.space 1/

CAIL = prerequisite knowledge for a critical perspective, such as to tell apart nonsense hype from true theoretical computer scientific claims. For example, the idea that human-like systems are a sensible or possible goal is the result of circular reasoning and anthropomorphism.

This is so good I'M CRYINGGGGG

Re your bit on Islamic algorithms, I have this illuminated piece where I compare the algorithmic art of the empire to LLMs as political propaganda logicmag.io/supa-dupa-sk...

1️⃣ That's @irisvanrooij.bsky.social's tractable cognition thesis which helps constrain theories 2️⃣ Also something the dynamical systems cognitive scientists get confused about when they think they have rejected computationalism 3️⃣ Still doesn't imply we know or can ever know the computations* 1/

It just doesn't seem sustainable for LLM vendors to keep training on copyrighted materials

ˢᵐᵒˡ ᵖᶦⁿᵉᵃᵖᵖˡᵉ

Useless comment from me, but those fruits looks so good 🌝

for passersby, I would also recommend this recent piece where @emilymbender.bsky.social reflects on how people have (mis)understood and (mis)used the phrase "stochastic parrots" over the years: medium.com/@emilymenonb...

* What this means is that even if we accept / assume computationalism, i.e. that cognition is computationally understandable / describable, we still may never ever be able to write those computations down. The search for them is intractable. See: bsky.app/profile/iris...

“We must protect and cultivate the ecosystem of human knowledge. AI models can mimic the appearance of scholarly work, but they are (by construction) unconcerned with truth — the result is a torrential outpouring of unchecked but convincing-sounding “information”. — as quoted in Guest et al. (2026)

> Noor van der Heijden of the Auteursbond called the scale unprecedented and alarming: “AI models [use] illegally obtained, copyrighted material. Those texts have been stolen from our writers and now such an AI book maker is competing with the robbed writers. We as the Auteursbond are against that”

Ga je eerst even verdiepen in de stad waar je het over hebt. Nijmegen heeft herhaaldelijk een van de grootste noodopvangplekken in Nederland ter beschikking gesteld. in no time veel vrijwilligers ter ondersteuning Ook voldoet Nijmegen ruimschoots aan de spreidingswet.

Welkom in Nijmegen! Geweldig om te zien hoeveel mensen laten zien dat mensen die vluchten voor oorlog en geweld, hier welkom zijn. ❤️

"I am suddenly less interested in their policy on LLMs and more interested in their policy on ethics. Excluding ethical concerns as a basis for policy is what you do when you know your preferred policies are unethical. Any project which accepts such an exclusion should be treated as a threat."

Já passamos por isso antes! Como assim?, por Olivia Guest Tradução parcial de “We’ve been here before!”, de @olivia.science , 18 de fevereiro de 2026. adolfoneto.elixiremfoco.com/blog/posts/2...

I need to start making videos again that teach programming in a natural way, without AI

Now is a period of time when the folks in charge are very big into offering false binaries & forced choices. Everyone else ends up becoming reactive because they don’t feel they can take the time to stop & think, but it’s necessary. It’s an inefficiency dressed up as efficiency. To what end?

6. the extremely unhinged series of claims that without training them on how to be users of such systems that we somehow fail as teachers — truly ludicrous, utterly bizarre, and in fact directly contradicts other industry selling points. (Section 3.6 here doi.org/10.5281/zeno...) 8/n

exactly! bsky.app/profile/oliv...

That’s exactly what will happen. Current frameworks being proposed for education begin with the assumption that students should use whatever systems they’re provided. They leave out a couple of steps before that: should you use them at all, what kind, for what purposes.

I’m concerned about people who want students to critique ‘AI’ systems by making them use those systems.

This is a serious problem that will end w victim blaming & forcing students to take responsibility for things that are not their fault (next in line for culpability: teachers who didn’t teach them well enough to know that something went wrong —everyone but the system & the profiteers).

> teaching students how to question and critique [AI] should not be the panacea for biased, unregulated, and problematic AI. There is a risk that a focus on digital literacies can responsibilise young people in dealing with the significant problems of generative AI. www.ox.ac.uk/news/2025-11...

The coolest thing about programming (not with LLMs, actually coding) is how close it is to spells. When you know how to code, the computer does what you tell it to. It's pleasing and beautiful. Chatbots take away that ability and skill, in totality forever, since they cannot follow instructions.

@jelmerevers.com maybe useful, from US union

In case useful: www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/volume-162-p... bsky.app/profile/oliv...

Universities' "top-down implementation ignores severe institutional risks: imminent workforce displacement, inherent, unfixable data hallucinations, work intensification, systematic intellectual property theft, and widespread student skepticism."

The AAUP is proud to support the Sanders/AOC AI Data Center Moratorium Act because the future of technology must be governed democratically, sustainably, & in service of working people—not corporate profit. ➡️https://www.aaup.org/news/aaup-backs-data-center-moratorium

The AAUP supports this AI Data Center Moratorium because the future of technology must be governed democratically, sustainably, and in service of working people—not corporate profit.

Resistance to reckless implementation of AI is growing. Local communities have successfully blocked data center construction projects & faculty unions have blocked vendor contracts & codified protective language in collective bargaining agreements.

yes, this is very important and relatedly to hold the field(s) to account when they do not take their role seriously as academic disciplines!

I'm happy you mention this. I've been encouraging people who ask: how do we resist 'AI' to use your work in that space as a guide for action. But ALSO, to see cognitive science as a living research program producing insights that refute tech industry reductionism.

For more on me and my work — as well as for PDFs to any paper that may not be directly accessible otherwise — see: olivia.science 6/

Also a short & snappy paper on these issues, esp. for psychologists and cognitive neuroscientists interested in modelling and AI & in how they contribute to or even hinder research, is this w/ @andreaeyleen.bsky.social @irisvanrooij.bsky.social: doi.org/10.5281/zeno... bsky.app/profile/oliv... 5/

On the other hand, I want to highlight my work that is about cognition, models, theory (see: olivia.science/theory/) & understanding how we think about them. Sometimes a good starting point is to zoom out: What Makes a Good Theory, and How Do We Make a Theory Good? doi.org/10.1007/s421... 4/

Notice this extract from the 90s by Sheryl Hamilton which references the late 40s, which I use in doi.org/10.3390/bs16... to highlight it's nothing new. Part of doing good work, while fighting against AI, is not falling for speed, as Isabelle Stengers also warns in Another Science is Possible. 3/

On the one hand, these AI forces — what I describe above as ideas that radiate outwards — have been discussed for decades (notice extract from 1985; doi.org/10.5281/zeno...) before they became as huge a mess as we see now, see: olivia.science/ai/ and bsky.app/profile/oliv... 2/

More here bsky.app/profile/iris...

When something isn't possible and it's actually intractable... Yeah you swallow up the entire planet to make your nonsense books bsky.app/profile/iris...

Human knowledge is a rich and living ecosystem, and worth protecting! Let's keep it natural

The 2nd coolest thing about it is teaching yourself and others how to do it. Some of my ideas also with @samhforbes.bsky.social here: Teaching coding inclusively: if this, then what? doi.org/10.5117/TVGN... bsky.app/profile/oliv...

"An important piece of reading to understand why this document is necesary is “Against the Uncritical Adoption of ‘AI’ Technologies in Academia” by @olivia.science [et al.]" cc @marentierra.bsky.social @altibel.bsky.social @felienne.bsky.social @lucyavraamidou.bsky.social @jedbrown.org

Against the Uncritical Adoption of ‘AI’ Technologies in Academia AI companies and their rhetoric infringe on academia in harmful ways, mirroring past uncritical acceptance of industry logics, such as those of tobacco and petroleum... www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/volume-162-p...

if you suspect a review of your manuscript may contain synthetic text, but you cannot proof it, what do you do?

This hangs with the other statements in fig 1: 1️⃣ ANNs (artificial neural networks) are inspired by human organism 2️⃣ ANNs are a black box we don't understand 3️⃣ We understand neither ANNs nor cognition therefore they are similar All 3 are misplaced! We unpack this... doi.org/10.5281/zeno... 3/

Preprinted! Been working on this for ~1 year w wonderful coauthors Nancy & Mark: > Understanding Artificial Neural Networks: Mysterianism about Known Mechanism is Mysticism doi.org/10.5281/zeno... Have you noticed many experts say they don't understand AI? What's going on? 🤯 Let us tell you... 1/

It is becoming really difficult to work or read in this circus. (Sound on)

Preprint update arxiv.org/abs/2602.07519