12/21 U.S. Senate Republicans are already using AI slop to deceive Maine voters #maine #MEpolitics

What historians (and other scholars do) is create knowledge. We should use that phrase more and talk about what it means. I think we don't, and it's part of why AI enthusiasts are confused when we don't readily agree that our work can be replicated/replaced by their products.

Truly a banner day for AI boosters rudely jumping into conversations, framing their arguments in a condescending and insulting way, and demanding civility from ppl who disagree.

A weird thing, for me, with all this AI crap is how thirsty AI users are to get the rest of us to use it, too. Why does it bother them so much if we're opposed to it and would rather not? They're SO MAD about it.

Truly a banner day for AI boosters rudely jumping into conversations, framing their arguments in a condescending and insulting way, and demanding civility from ppl who disagree.

These folks are resurrecting 18th century racism. See Benjamin Franklin from 1751. founders.archives.gov/documents/Fr...

Go with 1990s racist immigration policy, get 1990s polling numbers with Latinos. assets1.cbsnewsstatic.com/hub/cms/prod...

please let “bugs bunnying” become the slang for manipulating an LLM into ignoring its guardrails, i have never seen a more succinct and evocative term for it

This project is using very big data to show what @jamellebouie.net keeps saying: the yglesias types aren't standing in reporting about some silent majority backlashing against CRT, DEI, and progressive racial ideology. They ARE the backlash.

More from the important research by @lachlanmcnamee.bsky.social @salmamousa.bsky.social & @kylepeyton.bsky.social: The backlash to CRT and DEI was concentrated among educated & professional class centrists & Republicans. Working class, who Yglesias says backlashed, didn't actually care

AI advocates: you really need to learn to stop coming off to subject matter experts in other fields as if you’re Kool-Aid manning into the room and going “you’re dumb not to use these tools for your trivially easy jobs” you may think this is an unfair read on your intentions, but life is unfair.

LLM companies are open about prioritizing engagement over truthfulness. They know that if If LLMs say "I don't know" too much then ppl will stop using them. These dynamics are absolutely toxic for research, where truthfulness is the highest priority. www.science.org/content/arti...

"I think refusing is actually the more hopeful, expansive vision of the future than the one that is telling us that the future is already settled and decided. That's my daring idea. Just say no."

LLM companies are open about prioritizing engagement over truthfulness. They know that if If LLMs say "I don't know" too much then ppl will stop using them. These dynamics are absolutely toxic for research, where truthfulness is the highest priority. www.science.org/content/arti...

"I think refusing is actually the more hopeful, expansive vision of the future than the one that is telling us that the future is already settled and decided. That's my daring idea. Just say no."

Historians: Famously don't like to do a lot of reading. Ah-may-zing.

All of this thread. I understand the self interest that AI salesmen have to push their product, but the grasping way they’re doing it — the internet version of a traveling salesmen putting his foot in the door so you can’t close it — is only going to drive more people away.

I'm particularly fond of the idea that you must read every source or outsource all of it to AI. Yes, those are absolutely the only two options.

You absolutely will not convince a bunch of historians and sociologists and whoever else is in this thread that you know more than we do about this and we should use it. I wish you AI enthusiasts would stop wading into our conversations. You have nothing helpful to contribute and are snarky.

The propagandists who started the backlash to the 1619 project and critical race theory admitted they were lying to achieve segregationist goals. Calling the movement that resulted a moral panic is accurate. I'm sorry you got taken by hucksters, but that's on you.

Since there seems to be a flurry of Yglesias discourse on here today, here is my take. He recently joined the moral panic over teaching about race--on the side of the racists. And he gets critical race theory wrong because he superficially engages with it.

The tortured logic the right uses to create new forms/ideas of racial birthright, while also shrinking the circle of whiteness.

The term "heritage American" being bandied about is irritating b/c of its imprecision. Is it based on length of time in the US of your ancestors, being from England, whiteness, legal citizenship, or some other unspoken category? Because the migration trends in the colonial period & early republic 1/

Full panel here m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwwn...

Full panel here m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwwn...

Extremely evocative of stealing jpgs from the NFT people

There is a guy in this thread, a software engineer and not a historian, earnestly telling a historian that it’s fine to use an LLM to “summarize” readings, like it’s not already bad enough trying to figure out when real sources like Bede aren’t making things up without a robot making it worse.

Hiccup-ocalypse

“Stop stealing and start creating” is a real thing an “AI artist” said

There is not a single person on this website who could make it one time.* *only exceptions are if you played D1 ball within the last, say 3 years. You might make it once or twice.

Yea, I saw one quote from a guy who said he was doing "science that was really challenging" and therefore needed to use AI. I guess all the science the rest of us are doing is easy!

I've seen some people saying that the new SFWA rule on "AI" in the Nebulas will prevent people from being transparent about their LLM use. Newsflash: They wouldn't have been anyway. It would cost them readers. It would cost them votes. It would potentially cost them opportunities with publishers.

Amazing how many of these papers are about “ethical use of AI in education.” It’s harsh, I know, but I do think if you incorporate a hallucinated reference it should be incredibly damning for you. There should be professional penalties.

My book is now available for pre-order! Use the code E26CRLLO to get 30% off the paperback edition. www.dukeupress.edu/the-business...

block early, block often, don't think twice about it First interaction with somebody unpleasant or hostile? Block. Bad vibes? Block. weird engagement clown sending his armies of "well actually" dipshits your way? Block. Tired of me bitching endlessly about corporate power? Block me. do it

My book is now available for pre-order! Use the code E26CRLLO to get 30% off the paperback edition. www.dukeupress.edu/the-business...

Quite the chart. www.ft.com/content/30a4...

CATO INSTITUTE: Despite DOGE slashing jobs, government spending in every month of 2025 “was greater than in every other year .. An observer who did not know when DOGE started could not identify it” on a chart. 🤡 www.cato.org/blog/doge-pr...

It’s the entire point. There’s no plan to make this meaningful for students. No plan to use it administratively. Its design and implementation signals its only real intent. It’s best and easiest use case is for systematic harassment and to scare faculty into complying in advance.

New publication out: "Weathering the Rhetorical Climates of AI." I'm really excited that it's open access! publicationsncte.org/content/jour...

Recife ❤️

Red flags all over the place

Bill Maher furious that he didn't get invited.

"Works that used LLMs at any point during the writing process must disclose this upon acceptance of the nomination, and those works will be disqualified."

"Works that used LLMs at any point during the writing process must disclose this upon acceptance of the nomination, and those works will be disqualified."

YES. He never says anything interesting, is a total blowhard, and wasn’t even a great player. Boy, bye.