Elliot

@eecp.bsky.social

lawyer, but not your lawyer. views mine. formerly: YLS, tOSU Neuro & History of Sci/Tech, Wikimedia Fellow, HMS/MGH Center for Law Brain Behavior, LawAI

I teach a class on data science here at Illinois and during the seminar I host a competition for the class called "The Hunt for the Worst Data Visualization." This was my most popular post on Xitter, so reproducing some of the best submissions from previous years here:

"Scholastic said it was necessary to segregate these titles because 'there is now enacted or pending legislation in more than 30 U.S. states prohibiting certain kinds of books from being in schools'.... What laws...? Scholastic declined to answer the question."

Scholastic's "bigot button"

Scholastic, the popular publisher of children's books, is a big business. It is a publicly-traded company with a market capitalization of $1.15 billion. Its CEO, Peter Warwick, collected a total compe...

popular.info

This from Rebecca Solnit is my biggest fear about AI. Writing teaches me about myself, and I can't imagine handing that over to a machine whose only incentive is monetizing every aspect of my life. But many people will make that bargain, sacrificing their own self-awareness in the process.

Are there certain parts of the writing process that you can't really imagine AI replicating? Or can you just talk a little bit about the kind of labor that goes into writing the work that you do?

I'm a writer because I want to write. I don't want a machine to do it for me. I'm a writer because the process of writing is creative in what I do with language, but also in how I understand the subject. I often feel that I don't think hard enough about things until I have to write about them. Often my understanding changes in the process of writing. That's exciting for me. That's my own development, which, ideally, is somehow also something I can share with the readers.

I'm engaging in thinking, and what is the point of handing the job of thinking itself over, of understanding something more deeply, seeing the pattern that underlies? Why would I want to give up that profound experience?

Interesting conversation if you care about things like information source, platform, quality, and accessibility (which IMO we all should). Larger issues of how research and writing, especially for the public, are funded loom in the background, but that doesn't mean we can avoid hard questions.

Helen Rosner@hels.bsky.social · 3y ago

One thing I find fundamentally distressing about the monetized-newsletter model is the way it financially rewards cultivating a walled info garden/cult of personality situation — done right from a creator perspective, it narrows the readers’ sense of the world rather than expands it

Who falls for misinformation around the globe? Individuals with high analytic cognitive style, accuracy motivations, and valuing of democracy are better at discerning misinformation from true claims. Really fascinating paper that looks at 16 countries across 6 continents.

Figure 3: Consistent cross-cultural evidence that truth discernment is associated with analytic thinking, accuracy motivations and ideologyCross-country misinformation accuracy and sharingMisinformation accuracyFigure 6: Ratings from even small groups of laypeople can reliably distinguish true from false headlines

I'm an okay human who imagines what the better version of himself would do and tries to do that, with the hope that eventually all those better things will sink in. It's taking longer than I would hope, and I don't always manage to be my best self. But making the effort is its own reward.

Post nicht verfügbar.