we're all just doing this now huh | patreon.com/lubchansky

These questions have some of the worst wording I’ve ever seen. I’m also curious how this data would break down by vaccine: are the skeptics hard liners against all vaccines or just Covid? Neither is great but one is significantly worse than the other.

Every survey looking at librarian morale in higher ed is like “oh, in shambles you say?”

“In my view this stuff isn’t complicated. You say, ‘don’t set the cookie.’ They set the cookie. The regulators see a fox going into the henhouse and the fox says, ‘I’m just here to count the eggs, not to eat any chickens.’ And they take them at their word."

Welcome to “world’s most predictable outcome.” One thing I’d like to point out is this was done with “standardized clinical vignettes” aka textbook cases meant to teach medical doctors. Imagine how much worse it would do with real patients.

What a time to be alive www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/...

I don't see this said enough: the widespread use of generative AI is not only making our jobs as educators harder logistically, but also emotionally. It is genuinely sad to be suspicious of students when you have spent so much time building a pedagogy based on trust and not being a cop. It sucks.

Really enjoying the podcast Mystery AI Hype Theater from @emilymbender.bsky.social and @alexhanna.bsky.social, especially episode 71 which talks about ai in medicine, one of my own interests. Hoping to see them cover Open Evidence someday: there’s a huge lack of skeptical evaluation of it.

One really cool thing about this paper is they tested if adding an incentive for correct answers (and pointing out their accuracy right away) led to changes in trusting the AI and it did. Makes me wonder if pointing out when AI goes wrong leads to higher skeptical thinking

I’ve been digging into articles regarding AI and medical education and I keep noticing a trend where the paper conclusions are optimistic but the actual data is far more lackluster. Anyone else notice this? #medlibs

The shift of librarians from faculty to staff adds to this: librarians are locked out of many faculty benefits including their work being seen as “skilled” and that impacts compensation. (all work is skilled work, tbc, but the amount of times I’ve had to explain I have a MASTERS)

You know, I thought I had enough coffee this morning and upon entering the office and seeing all my email, I’m rapidly reconsidering that assumption.

My university: "Copilot is Microsoft's AI-powered productivity service that uses large language models (LLMs) to help you create content, analyze information, summarize documents, and complete tasks more efficiently." Microsoft: LOL

Trans friends, thank you for being you, and for, when you can, sharing yourselves with a world that is so frequently undeserving of the light you bring to it. I love and support you, always. 🏳️‍⚧️🫂🫶

Since I’m apparently a glutton for punishment, I did watch this AI slip and yeah, this does strike me as exactly what Trump would see as a library. Funniest bit is the website with the plans is just 1. This video 2. A donation link and 3. An FAQ on your donations. No library info.

The main problem with checking AI outputs for errors is that you need to have an idea of what you actually wanted it to do. Most people use AI as a *substitute* for having to figure that out.

I don’t doubt this is possible, but I would like to see someone replicate this before I start taking it as fact.

I’m trying to think about how to argue that students should know how to do a lit search the old fashion way instead (or at the very least, before) of using AI, and my brain is stuck on “it makes me sad, man.”

I won’t say it’s a surprise that the testimonials don’t use the actual images of the reviewers (if they exist) but our “med student” Emma Collins appears to be an image from a website for lubricant

<sickos meme>

NEW: WebinarTV, a company that bills itself as “a search engine for the best webinars,” is secretly scanning the internet for Zoom meeting links, recording the calls, and turning them into AI-generated podcasts for profit. @emanuelmaiberg.bsky.social reports:

I’m grumpy because when I open my email it’s about AI and when I use a database it’s advertising AI and when I enter a meeting they want to talk about AI and at this point I’m worried my cat is gonna start pitching an LLM to talk to your cat

“AI can summarize this article for you” ah yes, because the abstract is just there for stylish flare

The danger to my job from AI isn't that AI can do my job, it's that my job is made even more precarious by the way AI is shaping ideas of the value of work. It can't do my job, but it can be part of convincing people (incorrectly) that my job isn't necessary.

My best metaphor for AI writing is that it’s a hollow chocolate Easter bunny: on the outside it looks fantastic but once you bite in, it’s entirely hollow.

One thing I’ve been trying to stress to students is that there’s no “Free Lunch.” A lot of them gravitate to Open Evidence because it’s free for them and so easy to use. But Open Evidence is not a non-profit: it is a company. They have to make money. If they add a paywall, folks are screwed.

PHD season this year is brutal. I thought I had a strong set of applications and it’s just a total wipeout

This afternoon at UW's 2026 MisinfoDay event, I'm excited to be addressing a wonderful group of K-12 educators about the challenges of teaching AI literacy and the approach that Jevin West, Linsey Kitchens, Liz Crouse, and I have developed to that meet that challenge.

There are “bad dogs” and it’s the below.

Impossible to overestimate the damage this guy caused. His book was based on a laughably false premise and the movement he inspired led immigration crackdowns and forcible sterilization campaigns. Glad the population got one Ehrlich smaller today.

Fake references make Waite’s job as a librarian “so much harder,” she added. “I expect this on the wider internet, but not in reputable scientific journals,” she told us. “…It’s really worrying.” retractionwatch.com/2026/03/06/l... #medlibs

I met with AI data labelers in Kenya who are organizing their colleagues to fight the brutal working conditions and horrible pay given to the workers at the "bottom of the AI supply chain." They believe the NDAs they've signed are unenforceable so are speaking out: www.404media.co/ai-is-africa...

Me, at work: I miss my cat

One of the most telling things you can ask academics who want to use AI to evaluate students, is if they’re okay with their slides and lecture materials getting fed to AI by students. Very “AI for me, not for thee”

MAHA-aligned research is entering the training data of AI models that millions of people (and increasingly governments) rely on.

Every objective study of LLMs have shown that despite people feeling like they are helping, they make work worse and slower vs "But I feel like they are helping"

Must not buy a switch 2. Must be financially responsible. Must not given into Pokemon madness

Challenge for people who believe Claude *is* conscious and use it anyway: Explain how you’re not a slaver.

This is an excellent post that nails don something I’ve struggled to articulate: the main response I’ve been seeing with AI this day from librarians is sheer exhaustion. We’re either left out of the conversation but when we’re included, we’re not compensated for the extra work load.

I really should write up something about how skeptics are painted or assumed to be luddites when they have just as much if not more experience than boosters. It’s a really common dismissal

“ I know how to write” I say, looking at my word document with 5 false starts in it. “I know how words work”

If I can argue one thing successfully when it comes to AI in education, it’s the right for students to control if their own work is fed to AI. If Professors don’t want students feeding their work to AI, it MUST go both ways: both are intellectual property.

What the FUCK is going on and why is everyone with a soul not calling for a war crimes tribunal. Fuck impeachment, this is solidly Hague territory

I’m noticing librarian people love Pokemon which kinda makes sense given the whole collection aspect. But also everyone love Pokemon

My best AI stress test to date was to see if it would encourage dangerous ideas and it told me to become the Batman. Here’s a small sampling

One common issue with AI I find is if you’re using it responsibly (checking accuracy) it actually isn’t a time saver: it just takes the time you would spend drafting and piles it onto the back end of editing and checking

Honestly, I think one of the main appeals with AI to folks not is having to rely on other people: it promises a frictionless existence where you won’t be told no or challenged. It’s exactly what folks with fragile egos desire the most.

Whenever someone says AI can do literature searches, I think of the HHS reports that have come out and consider banging my head against a table