If plant-based foods must be more honest, let’s do the same for meat – fancy some ‘cow muscle’? | Deirdra Barr
@markmccormack
Sociologist. Professor. Focus on sexualities, transgressive consumption and society. Editor-in-Chief of Sexuality & Culture. Posts are in a personal capacity. I volunteer with The Loop, read and play badminton.
If plant-based foods must be more honest, let’s do the same for meat – fancy some ‘cow muscle’? | Deirdra Barr
kind of goes without saying but the punctuation in Cormac McCarthy is not a mistake
My experience with GenAI in a work capacity is the roll-out often involves people "saving time" by producing poor quality documents (of whatever) that then require people with expertise to resolve the issues; so the "efficiencies" are just outsourcing the quality issues to people who care.
AI companies are hiring people to produce data for practically any job you can imagine: chefs, management consultants, archivists, private investigators, rental-counter clerks. It is, as one industry veteran put it, the largest harvesting of human expertise ever attempted.
Awful fire, and to read it's because of a vape shop only makes it worse.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...
Hey Baris, and thanks. I think that's where I ended up - could be GenAI but certainly lack of proofing etc. Wasn't sure if it was just a template or not....
If a manuscript contains "Click or tap here to enter text" (perhaps in another language) does this mean the authors have used a template, or perhaps GenAI or similar?
Call for Papers: hybrid conference on Archives and Ethics (online and at @astonuniversity.bsky.social ! Experts from all fields welcome! padlet.com/dturner2_23/...
Deadline: 13 April 2026
1908: the Lancet, one of the most respected scientific journals, calls for 18 age limit on reading in bed amidst a moral panic surrounding children becoming "addicted" to novels, which were "designed to keep kids hooked" and destroy their attention/mental health
The easiest analytical assumption to make whenever Trump does something is that he hasn't thought it through at all. And yet everytime commentators contort themselves into believing there's some kind of strategy.
Very much this.
We (@lawrencemckay.bsky.social @williamlallen.bsky.social) have data on this stretching back to 2012 for a forthcoming report on the current academic job market in Politics - and let me just say it's unprecedentedly bad at the moment!
Way too many on the Left laughed off GB News as a joke, a money-loser sure to fail, not worth worrying about. Completely missed the point. It was a foothold for the international far right on the mainstream British media scene. No price is too high for that
🚨 It looks like the UK government is gearing up to upend copyright law in favour of AI companies, legalising the theft of their work.
This is despite creatives' huge protests, and despite previous proposals being roundly rejected by the public.
Please spread the word.
🧵 1/4
The mapping shows that the curiosity-led research ('bucket one') is applicant-led research, QR, and a sprinkling of smaller items from across UKRI. Applicant-led funding and QR are increasing from financial years 2025-26 to 2026-27, but overall curiosity-led research is receiving a smaller share of the increase in 2026-27 than other 'buckets'. . From this mapping, it appears 'curiosity-led' research as UKRI are defining it, is being protected, and is over 50% of the total investment. However, as we said in our question to Sir lan, QR is not all curiosity-led, it is at best 'non-Government directed'. This eliding of definitions is part of the reason that there is confusion around the statement that curiosity research is protected. Further, the statement that curiosity-led research is over 50% of the total budget risks looking dis-ingenious when a big chunk of it is QR funding.
Response from @sciencecampaign.bsky.social says ‘the statement that curiosity-led research is over 50% of the total budget risks looking disingenuous when a big chunk of it is QR funding.’
www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/analysis-and...
This loss of talent will have long term consequences for our national research base. Government and funders should do something about it.
It's partially criminalized through a range of policies - e.g., third party facilitation is criminalized, meaning sex workers can't legally work together or get support in a range of ways. They also report harassment from police in various contexts.
AIs can’t stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
Leading AIs from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google opted to use nuclear weapons in simulated war games in 95 per cent of cases
www.newscientist.com/article/2516...
It's not a popular message, but that there are as few as 185 people earning 100k at a big, serious uni like Cardiff is actually a signal of how low UK academic salaries are, and how much professorial salaries, in particular, have eroded comparatively.
www.timeshighereducation.com/news/top-ear...
Fascinating interview by @siennamarla with Reform UK's Danny Kruger - who (among other things) tells her political parties have a "limited but important" role in undoing the sexual revolution and UK is suffering from a "totally unregulated sexual economy".
www.politicshome.com/news/article...
Shocking news. Obviously one doesn't know the ins and outs, but it's hard to comprehend how such a large and weathy university as UCL finds itself unable to support a cutting-edge humanities research institute. Solidarity with everyone affected. www.ucl.ac.uk/institute-of...
In a narrower sense, does AI have a sociological imagination? Obviously not. Does the "author" who lightly edits the manuscript input a sociological imagination in that process? I'd hope not. SocSci is broader, of course, but I think an example of the epistemological question.
I think it's also an epistemological question as well. Is AI produced text work or scholarship in a meaningful sense? It might be, but I think that question needs to be part of the discussion.
I would also be very sceptical of the expertise and diligence of someone who has done that outsourcing to do the required checking, editing and thinking to ensure that the GenAI paper wasn't wrong (on data, theory, method).
I'm not convinced by the case for here - GenAI can't think, and writing is part of the thought process / refinement of ideas. Outsourcing all the "thinking" to GenAI leaves a gap where the core intellectual endeavour must be.
Basically whenever you see a news story based on survey results of 18-24 year olds, especially if it's a subset of a large poll of all age groups, just assume it's nonsense
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...
Goodness
Also astonishing
Astonishing