The Spectator published this attack on me & colleagues just as the High Court is considering Sussex’s request for review of the Office for Students fine. It accuses us of ‘repressing’ our students. The magazine ignored my request for to reply. Please disseminate.
alanlester.co.uk/blog/smearin...
The layers of a floppy disk are exploded so that each is visible.
schematic illustration of a cathode ray tube, with each element labeled.
I often find myself wanting to explain to students how things like floppy disks work. Great series of explainers with really helpful illustrations. Just gotta remember where this is next time I need it! www.makingsoftware.com
Sped-read "Life After Ambition" by Amil Niazi that just came out. It's sadly not the greatest book; the pieces of her story don't hang together into a coherent whole. Also it's hard to buy that she is "post-ambition" when she has a column in the Cut AND a book out with three really little kids.
I missed it it seems, but I just wanted to say I appreciate your writing and your work :)
This resonated a lot for me - I grew up at a time we were building the EU, opening borders, thought the internet would give us access to unprecedented knowledge… Like, I remember how impressive and hopeful the EU parliament and flag felt. I don’t know how we can pass that on, right now.
Funnily enough, it followed from an earlier question: “how do I know I don’t have two moms [like my friend]”
Or like my 3yo today, “how do we know that something exists?”
The underground sign looks pretty funky. Wikimedia Commons has good AI filters and every image is free to use if that’s helpful :) commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Categor...
I found Prairie Fires so interesting, especially the first part. Highly recommend reading it alongside Pioneer Girl: the annotated autobiography.
De la défiance envers la science au refus de se soigner, la désinformation en santé a des conséquences très concrètes. Comment la combattre ? Un rapport récent propose 9 recommandations et plaide pour la valorisation de l’information de qualité plutôt que la seule lutte contre les fausses nouvelles.
Ça a un nom, « last chance tourism ». Les gens qui veulent aller voir ce qui disparaît avant que ça ne le soit, accélérant par là la disparition…
It's a busy wiki day today - I wish people were sharing @theverge.com's article about the Enterprise API instead of the AP/TechCrunch coverage! www.theverge.com/news/862109/...
Today, @wikipedia.org turns 25 years old. It's never been more important — or under more attack from authoritarians. Here's what to know about how we got here, and what we can do to push for its future. There's no better example of the web we make together. www.anildash.com/2026/01/15/w...
wikipedia turns 25 today! the last unenshittified major website! backbone of online info! triumph of humanity! powered by urge of unpaid randos to correct each other! somehow mostly reliable! "good thing wikipedia works in practice, because it sure doesn't work in theory" - old wiki adage
This seems like a maliciously put headline to make people feel a certain way.
Wikipedia is not partaking in generative AI. They are making AI companies and scrappers having to pay for training their modules off wikipedia texts. And having an AI (not that ai) tasked with updating dead links.
Two toddlers are coloring wikipedia globes
Celebrating Wikipedia turning 25 with the kiddos today! Next year will be my ten year anniversary as a Wikipedian, and I am so incredibly grateful for that community as a person and as a parent. Here's to the next quarter century! 🎉
Sure. AI companies have ALWAYS been training their models on Wikipedia content, which under the free and open access model is available to anyone — including AI companies. Agreements like these require AI companies to limit and offset the strain they place on Wikimedia infrastructure.
scatterplot data papers with "proposed framework in the abstract" total papers count pct ABS 2010 1415014 575 0.406356404 2011 1522272 630 0.41385508 2012 1588086 814 0.5125667 2013 1681445 991 0.589374021 2014 1750369 1152 0.658146939 2015 1817581 1414 0.777957076 2016 1896252 1703 0.898087385 2017 1974589 1918 0.971341378 2018 2046790 2416 1.180384895 2019 2286048 3165 1.384485365 2020 2460860 4058 1.64901701 2021 2643033 5175 1.957977823 2022 2613870 5819 2.226200997 2023 2495395 6052 2.425267342 2024 2659073 6673 2.509521175 2025 2690143 11485 4.269289774
People who produce AI slop papers love to skip the boring research and get right to the dramatic discovery. The LLMs tell them their idea is awesome and original, and write it up as a "proposed framework" (with no data or evidence). That term increased 70% in Web of Science abstracts last year.
I know! But tadpoles are supposed to be the first symbolic drawing based on their self-perception, you have all these studies about how introducing drawing tools to children result in tadpoles, so I was very much expecting tadpoles! Maybe he just sees himself as a dinosaur! It’s been bugging me 😂
Not me reading scholarship about the development of drawing in young children because my 3 years old draws elaborate dinosaurs and landscapes but STILL NO TADPOLES. I should know better, but it still bothers my childhood-researcher-self that he's just skipping a pretty universal step 🙈
Screenshot of a paper entry: Fictional Failures and Real-World Lessons: Ethical Speculation Through Design Fiction on Emotional Support Conversational AI Authors: Faye Kollig, Jessica Pater, Fayika Farhat Nova, Casey Fiesler (There are tabs with "abstract" and "summary" and "summary" is selected.)
The ACM Digital Library, where a LOT of computing-related research is published (I'd say at least 75% of my own publications), is now not only providing (without consent of the authors and without opt-in by readers) AI-generated summaries of papers, but they appear as the *default* over abstracts.
this, from @kevinbaker.bsky.social, is a better analysis of the intersection between LLMs and academic science than 98% of what's out there.
Ah ça c'est comme vous voulez :) Je suis juste inquiète que notre biais (justifié!) anti Monsanto soit utilisée pour une attaque beaucoup plus large envers d'autres pans de recherche, comme en discute l'article du Signpost
Personne ne porte Monsanto dans son coeur, mais sur cette affaire, Kaurov et Oreskes simplifient beaucoup, le papier a été retiré notamment car les auteurs sont morts et ne peuvent pas répondre aux questions - et ce papier n'est plus cité depuis longtemps. Voir aussi en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiped...
Good luck losing less than an hour to this: a huge archive of logos for government, non-profit, private, military, and even fictional space agencies and companies. [kottke.org]
Internet n’est pas particulièrement connu pour n’héberger que des contenus obtenus légalement !
Il y a plein de choses avec lesquelles être d’accord, mais c’est confus : que vient faire Wikipedia là-dedans ? Et si l’équipe d’étapes veut s’assurer de la longévité et de l’archivage de ses textes, serait-ce si difficile de les numériser ?
ahah we've been needing to chat since forever. But yes!
I love the baby boxes and all things designing motherhood, but I can't believe that after Covid-times formula shortages, despite knowing many families need WIC to get formula (www.newsweek.com/money-moms-b...), hospitals are still treating mothers like idiots who can't be trusted.
"'baby-friendly hospitals' [promote] breastfeeding as best practice, [so] the new boxes include nursing supplies but no formula, bottles or pacifiers" really means "these hospitals would rather babies go hungry than providing accurate info about formula"
In 2025!!!
www.bloomberg.com/news/article...
