There is no such thing as "ethically using AI". AI is trained on stolen data. AI is destroying the environment and communities. AI is making us stupid. Use AI if you want, just don't pretend you're doing it in ethical way.
Man granted first-of-its-kind religious exemption against mandatory AI use at work — Humanist argues that offloading his thinking to LLMs violates his beliefs, Title VII accommodation protects employee
A research administrator at the University of Kentucky was granted a Title VII exemption, allowing them to not use AI tools as it goes against their moral beliefs.
#hardware
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/secular-humanist-gets-religious-exemption-from-using-ai-argues-that-offloading-his-thinking-to-llms-violates-his-beliefs-american-humanist-association-says-its-the-first-case-of-its-kind
Well it seems I'm doing yearly releases now, so, Toot! v27.0 has been released!
There isn't that much new in this, it is mainly a maintenance release to fix some UI bugs on iOS 27. The actual change list is:
- Fixed some UI issues on iOS 27.0.
- Added an option to not hide the tab bar on scroll.
- Made it possible to make a quote with no text but only a content warning.
- More patience.
I don't know which level this is I'm on now, but, I'm feeling a bit iffy about this story making the rounds of Marissa Mayer using AI to describe her child.
Because, yeah, sure, it's ridiculous AI psychosis bullshit and sociopath behaviour. But is it any worse than the million examples we have of these people absolutely failing at being humans?
Other, than, you know, how it is about a WOMAN failing her MOTHERLY DUTIES.
It's just, it's giving a bit of ick.
What good day to have always been strongly bigoted against PHP.
Did I just write almost 5000 words about why generative "AI" should be resisted, going through every single one of my reasons?
Yes. Because I need this article to exist so I can point people to it.
Enjoy and share widely.
https://estherweidauer.com/articles/why-resist-generative-ai.html
the main interesting thing about GTA 6 to me is that it's kind of a retro throwback to an era of gaming where every game just gets bigger and has more graphics and more animations and more realism so the game becomes a 1:1 replica of the real world, from sprawling horizons to the leaves of a single shrub. 20 years ago it was expected, but nobody can afford to do it now. the project exists to do something implausible and nostalgic. its unique infeasibility IS its marketing, like a flying car
This book also predicted cryptocurrencies, which isn't that surprising because there were already people trying to figure out how to create them at the time, even though nobody had quite succeeded yet, but it was also pretty good at predicting the consequences of cryptocurrencies.
Getting just a little bit fucking tired of the Youtube algorithm regularly going "Oh, you watched two videos from this channel? Would you like to: WATCH NOTHING BUT THAT CHANNEL FOREVER NOW?" and making literally 75% of the front page be ONE SINGLE CHANNEL.
Who thought this was a good feature. Are there HUMANS working at Youtube still.
What I like most about it, I think, is that it asks the question, "When did humanity lose control of its destiny", in a world where it most definitely has, and then lets its different characters give different opinions, with some saying it happened in the real past, and some in the fictional future, thus reframing the actual question to "have we already lost control of our destiny or not".
Look, this was written in 1994, and it refers to the "First Gulf War", nine years before the second one happened. Not the most difficult of predictions to get right, granted, but it sets a tone.
If you want to read the whole passage - and I think you should - I've included it here. As I said, this really stuck with me very strongly.
This is a book that by all measures should be fairly unremarkable, but, for some reason, in writing this Bruce Sterling makes prediction after prediction that ends up weirdly prescient. I know, of course, that sci-fi is never about predicting the future, just exaggerating the present, and that accurate prediction is never the goal.
And yet.
This book just keeps doing it.
So. There's a piece of writing that has stuck with me for all of the thirty years since I first read it, in Bruce Sterling's _Heavy Weather_. It is a book about storm chasers in a future ravaged by global warming and collapse, and towards the end, there is a scene on the eve before the big storm hits where a journalist joins the very diverse crew of storm chasers to ask them a question, and we get an answer from each one, with all of their different perspectives. A particular excerpt follows:
Coding agents reduce software development to a simple matter of:
* specifying requirements
* verifying correctness and quality
* maintaining and operating software you didn't write
As we all know, those have always been the easiest, most well-understood parts of the craft, so everything is fine!
reposting this because holy FUCK if this isn't so goddamn true
@mcc just say no. you can‘t be sick without your consent
new post: QR codes that can be read multiple different ways!
Including a \\ world first // (?) four different payloads in a single QR code!
https://halcy.de/blog/2026/10/01/qr-codes-that-can-be-read-multiple-different-ways/
Ok, so, we all know skyfish, right? They are famous cryptids that are particularly popular in Japanese occult circles, and are more commonly known as "rods" in English.
According to the OFFICIAL history, they were first discovered in Roswell, New Mexico in 1994 by a guy who was definitely not filming insects flying past his camera at night.
