If you know a manager who actually wants to prioritize reliable, accurate AI, tell them to check out our book Auditing AI. And if they refuse to test their systems, our book is a helpful guide to journalists, citizens, and public servants seeking accountability. auditingai.cc

Home - Auditing AI -- The Book

How tech companies, journalists, and policymakers can prevent AI decision-making from going wrong. How tech companies, journalists, and policymakers can

auditingai.cc

Hypervisible @hypervisible.blacksky.app · 3d ago

“The AI assistant, which Kinney Drugs named Burt, after its founder, was built by a third-party AI pharmaceutical company, Synerio. In the pharmacy’s terms, Kinney Drugs states that ‘Burt may not be accurate, complete or up-to-date and may be misleading or contain errors and omissions.’”

Permission to ban the phrase “And honestly?” from all social media posts ever

Next time people say lawmakers don't understand LLMs, remember they are paying significant sums to influence chatbots rather than regulate them.

Hypervisible @hypervisible.blacksky.app · 2w ago

“Everyone’s just grasping for some sort of tool to at least inspect these results and ideally influence them…”

Want access to expensive subscription archives of academic papers and other paywalled online material? People often ask me as an academic to share access with them, but there's a better way: active @wikipedia.org editors can get The Wikipedia Library for free! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiped...

A lenticular spoof ad near Meta’s London headquarters transforms Kylie Jenner’s Meta AI smart glasses campaign into a surveillance warning, depending on the viewing angle. Original post

My heart is heavy that we are making a collective miscalculation in undervaluing the humanities - from my FT piece www.ft.com/content/fbde...

the major project im working on this summer is about llm-produced summaries! across frontier models summary is very rhetorically weird and highly structured but in different ways in different models! in all of them the summary you get depends more than a little on who the model thinks you are!

Greg Pak@gregpak.net · 4w ago

If you use "A.i." to summarize something, you will never know what kind of mistakes it's excreting until it's too late and you've deeply embarrassed yourself or destroyed your business/reputation.

This is where I am on AI consciousness btw. Yes, theoretically possible, if not probable! But we are definitely not there yet.

Shannon Vallor@shannonvallor.bsky.social · last mo.

At best three (of forty) thought that there was a conceptual possibility of AI consciousness, which would require entirely new and still-unknown architectures to realise

Being a woman rocks because if you use AI you’re stupid and if you don’t use AI you’re dumb

David Ho@davidho.bsky.social · last mo.

Women’s use of AI is perceived as a sign of incompetence, while men’s use of AI is seen as an indication of initiative. 🤦🏻‍♂️

Brb time to edit my website

Jonathon Booth@jboothhistory.bsky.social · last mo.

I recently googled a very junior academic (still a PhD student) and the google AI summary described them "distinguished" and a "leading scholar" which made me think it was drawing from (invisible?) text on the person's own website. Manipulating AI results is clearly going to be big business soon

So many posts about how millennials look younger than their age but everyone just looks their age plus Botox

Writing is just cycling between “best idea ever” and “worst idea ever” until eventually you just get tired and submit it

“The message that I always bring when I have a chance is that, when the text that comes out of one of these systems makes sense, it’s because we are making sense of it. This is also in the stochastic parrots paper.”

What Emily Bender Really Meant by "Stochastic Parrots"

Five years later, its lead author revisits the paper in the age of ChatGPT

spectrum.ieee.org

So, this is in print now. Title pretty much says it all. virginialawreview.org/articles/abo...

“While the ruling didn’t directly address Flock, attorneys say the decision addresses several of the same privacy concerns they have raised in challenging law enforcement’s largely unrestricted use of Flock’s nationwide license plate database.”

New SCOTUS decision could be used against Flock, attorneys say. Here’s how.

A Supreme Court ruling on geofence warrants may influence legal challenges to Flock license plate readers over privacy concerns, attorneys say.

cleveland.com

Hardest part about starting a new job is switching from a Google office to an Outlook office. It’s like going back in time.

if you have feelings about SCOTUS after today, and after the last week, and after the last months and years, remember that at least you can vote for state supreme courts in many places this year, and those matter a ton too my state-by-state guide to every state supreme court contest:

Your State-by-State Guide to the 2026 Supreme Court Elections - Bolts

Abortion, redistricting, and ballot access remain heated issues as voters face dozens of supreme court races across 32 states this year.

boltsmag.org

Since 2016, California enacted more AI regulations than any other state. The president's new order against such laws worries state officials.

State AI regulation is in the crosshairs of Trump executive order – The Markup

Since 2016, California enacted more AI regulations than any other state. The president's new order against such laws worries state officials.

bit.ly

Just sitting here staring at my screens and sweating through another record-breaking heat wave as my government decides to give or take fundamental rights away on a whim. We were promised jetpacks.

Good news! The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, a right that essentially every single competent and well-meaning constitutional law scholar agrees has been well-decided for over a century. Congratulations, no one! We have secured the bare minimum of rights we already had! 🎉

Just a reminder that it was absolutely not obvious and certain that SCOTUS would rule the right way on birthright citizenship. Thank goodness we haven’t fallen that far yet as a nation. A win is a win, no matter how small.

Tiffany C. Li@tiffanycli.bsky.social · 4mo ago

When the birthright citizenship decision comes out, people will say it could never have gone any other way, that the law was obvious. But the mere fact that SCOTUS took on the case is evidence enough that we are living in a time of democratic precarity.

I am stunned that the constitutional question was so close. I thought it would be 6–3 or 7–2. It is profoundly disturbing that four justices would allow either the president or Congress to rewrite the plain text of the 14th Amendment. This is obviously a good outcome, but the margin is alarming.

striking down the birthright EO by 6-3 is like clearing the lowest bar possible but also tripping on the bar on your way over

anyway i think the proper takeaway here is that a bare majority of the court thinks the plain words of the 14th amendment mean what they say, that four members believe there is a secret hidden meaning only recently discovered by hack lawyers

I can’t bring myself to be too celebratory. This should have been a 9-0 slam dunk. My main takeaway is that there are currently 4 votes to undo a longstanding constitutional guarantee that 15 years ago seemed beyond any serious question.

David J. Bier@davidjbier.bsky.social · last mo.

This day will be celebrated, but it never should have come to this. President Trump attempted to subvert the clear words of our Constitution and the traditions of our country for hundreds of years by instructing ICE to arrest US-born Americans. It was an attempted crime.

This day will be celebrated, but it never should have come to this. President Trump attempted to subvert the clear words of our Constitution and the traditions of our country for hundreds of years by instructing ICE to arrest US-born Americans. It was an attempted crime.

Comforting to remember that, in the long, long term view, things are good and getting better. Unfortunately, we live in the short term.

From the story: Scarlata and Gingras are concerned that papers by less prominent scientists have disappeared as well without anyone realizing. At a minimum, Gingras wants Planck’s papers restored.... “just put them [back] in the database. Intellectually, it’s not acceptable.” (4/4)

Why have papers by one of history’s most famous physicists been retracted?

Springer Nature has removed two studies by Max Planck. A bot may be to blame

science.org