Chris Lentini

@lentinic.bsky.social

Imagine interviewing someone for a job at your workplace and after asking them to explain something relevant to the job they are applying for, they answer "If you hire me then I can give you a full explanation" It's pretty ludicrous that this is the apparent norm when confirming nominees...

Aaron Rupar@atrupar.com · 13h ago

MURRAY: The Trump admin falsely labeled birth control as abortion. Do you agree that an IUD is an abortifacient? OVERTON: If confirmed, I'll be fully briefed M: That's not an answer. The prospect of an FDA commissioner who doesn't know that birth control isn't an abortion is deeply alarming O: 😊

I imagine the constant glazing & agreeability some llms will perform is kind of what's like to be a rich/powerful person that has surrounded themself with yes-men. Personally, the experience gets exhausting.

arxiv.org/abs/2507.13758 "LRMs are consistently more susceptible to RTB [reasoning theater bias] than general-purpose LLMs" Basically - they are susceptible to flawed arguments that nonetheless present as logical. Honestly, sounds like a lot of people in the world right now...

Reasoning Models Can be Easily Hacked by Fake Reasoning Bias

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) like DeepSeek-R1 and o1 are increasingly used as automated evaluators, raising critical questions about their vulnerability to the aesthetics of reasoning in LLM-as-a-jud...

arxiv.org

Case in point - the horrible tragedy unfolding now. We ignore reality at our own peril. Sadly, even the inevitable misery that follows from trying to pretend like truth is something you control is not enough to wake some people up. A truth I did not fully appreciate until covid

Chris Lentini@lentinic.bsky.social · last yr.

It's a kind of subjectivism or even solipsism, I guess. All that matters is having the power to impose your truth on the world. An inherently fragile / dead-ended way of living. Ultimately reality asserts itself - COVID / natural disaster / etc - with pain and misery sure to follow

"They're just kids" Okay, then why are they being allowed to rampage through sensitive government systems? "They are smart capable professionals" Okay, then why shouldn't they be subject to the same scrutiny and oversight as any other person wielding this much power? You can't have it both ways

The issue, IMO, with all the "we'll work with Trump/RFK/etc on housing/spending/whatever" - it cedes the initiative and leadership to them, legitimizing them. Now you aren't the one with the good ideas, they are; you are just along for the ride.

I think a lot of the angst about e.g. Liz Cheney endorsing Harris is that usually endorsement = exchange of favors, i.e. she gets some policy concession. The issue I think is that here the concession == this candidate (Harris) promises not to round her up in some targeted attack on political foes

I would love to see Trump asked about repealing the 19th Amendment. I think if you framed it the right way you could get him to express openness to it. Play his instincts - can't admit ignorance (so nothing about what it is) and pandering (so like "many supporters think it was a mistake")

So, judges shouldn't defer to federal agencies rulemaking, but the President is basically god-king. If the President tells a federal agency to say "fuck the courts, go enforce that rule" does the universe then implode?