Reilly Spitzfaden (they/them)

@reillypascal.bsky.social

Composer & programmer who likes noise, obsolete media, electronics, and nostalgia Website: https://reillyspitzfaden.com Mastodon: https://hachyderm.io/@reillypascal Mastodon (follow from Bsky): https://bsky.app/profile/reillypascal.hachyderm.io.ap.brid.gy

I think being anti AI is entering a more mainstream phase! While incredibly good at the same time we're finally meeting a low bar. This means: 1) more critical thinking is needed now as non-experts are making anti AI arguments so we could promote worse arguments overall — remember: 1/

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ@olivia.science · 8mo ago

Respecting Expertise is the epistemic compact between professionals and society. See section 5 here: doi.org/10.5281/zeno... 6/

5 Respecting Expertise
The compact between professionals and society at large requires respect of expertise — from well
funded publicly owned academia to protecting certain fields from epistemic trespassing — for
expertise to keep existing. That is, between academia and its host society there exists understanding that academia is publicly funded, directly or through grants, to produce knowledge; and furthermore that it exists to train and certify highly skilled graduates. Academic expertise can only
continue to exist if statements made by academics are understood as coming from highly skilled
research and educational practitioners. What this means is that it goes both ways: experts need
to be framed correctly as domain-specific scholars, as well as that statements they make outside
their expertise are understood as such. By the same token, that conflicts of interest are publicly
known and acknowledged. AI upends all this, violating the compact between academia and society and within academia under its expansionist imperialist scheme (Guest, Suarez, et al. 2025;
Solomonides et al. 1985). Sherry Turkle (1984) describes AI as a “colonising discipline” that sweeps
away everything that came before under the guise of “intellectual immaturity” — using social privilege to undermine expertise and breaking down the boundaries between disciplinary expertise. At
the extreme, it becomes both the case that everybody is an expert in AI, provided they are white
and male, and that nobody is an expert in anything since only experts in AI can now practice any
form of academic pursuit. The same for education: nobody can teach without the imposition of AI
into their learning environments.
Another perspective that results in experts being undermined, and turbocharged by AI, is the
practice by colleagues and others of critical washing (Guest, Suarez, et al. 2025; Suarez et al. 2025):
wherein scholarly critique is rendered decorative. Logics such as ‘I am aware of the downsides,
therefore …

Nature did a short piece on our preprint about how LLMs will affect the practice of science; my more detailed thread is below.

Scientists using LLMs will ‘do more, less well’, modelling study predicts

Research suggests that the combination of incentives to publish and the use of large language models will lead to more papers, but they will be less refined.

nature.com

Carl T. Bergstrom@carlbergstrom.com · 2w ago

1. We—@eduede.bsky.social, @mjcrockett.bsky.social, Kevin Gross, and I—have a new preprint on the arXiv today, based on ideas that emerged during an @sfiscience.bsky.social workshop in November 2024: The unintended consequences of large language models as a labor-augmenting technology in science.

13. Hence our dismal conclusion: rather than finding that LLMs free us to do a better job of what we were doing before they came along, they shift scientific incentives (and the playing field of academic competition) in ways that compel us to do more and more, faster and faster, less and less well.

12. Here's the key insight though: as labor-augmenting technologies LLMs make researchers more productive and therefore they *raise the opportunity cost of researcher time*. As a result researchers will have incentives to invest less time in polishing a current project before moving on to a new one.

🚨 WE HAVE A DEAL! After three years, in a major step forward for our members, we have ratified our first contract with @propublica.org’s management. We deeply appreciate everyone who supported us along the way. Here are some of our big wins👇

A graphic poster reads "We have a deal! The ProPublica Guild has reached a deal with ProPublica's management on our first contract and has voted to ratify it. Swipe for the highlights [pointing emoji].

That quote links to articles on AlphaFold (and variants) and GNoME, neither of which are large language models. AlphaFold shares some concepts with LLMs (attention and transformers); GNoME not so much. (2/7)

We (faculty at USC) took on an institutional behemoth with all the money and clout on earth, and we WON. We won our union. We're the biggest private-university faculty union in US history. Trying to make people care about this, challenge level IMPOSSIBLE

> There are numerous actions in nearly every match that could warrant a VAR intervention. It’s up to the human to decide. VAR in other words has not removed bias, but rather moved it around the field, and maybe obscured it from direct view a little. www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/what-var-t...

What VAR tells us about AI

FIFA's semi-automated refereeing system promises neutrality but brims with bias. It's widely despised yet embraced by elites. It is, in other words, a lot like AI.

bloodinthemachine.com

> In January, she posted the name of Jonathan Ross, citing news reports. Ross is the ICE agent who shot protester Renee Good in Minnesota. […] > > “I think today is a great day for Jonathan to be indicted,” the post says. www.syracuse.com/news/2026/06...

Federal agents track down Syracuse woman, demand she remove Instagram post about ICE

She believes the warning was related to a post about the ICE agent who shot Renee Good in Minneapolis.

syracuse.com