It wasn't intentional, but I just realised I'm on a loosely themed #AI reading spree. I'm currently working my way through The #Murderbot Diaries, which is thoroughly enjoyable. I interrupted the series because I wanted to read #Neuromancer though, and I just finished it. That one is now up there among the best books I have read. I loved it! I recently ordered #theAIcon by @emilymbender and @alex , but as it's still in the mail I'm now doing Network Effect first. More Murderbot goodness! #books #reading

Ed Zitron you are my effing hero: https://www.wheresyoured.at/ai-doesnt-have-roi/

No one says it better. (Or less profanely.)

#theAIcon #AInsanity #congame #aididntworkinthe1990sanditisntworkingnow

AI Doesn't Have ROI

If you liked this piece, you should subscribe to my premium newsletter. It’s $70 a year, or $7 a month, and in return you get a weekly newsletter that’s usually anywhere from 5,000 to 18,000 words, including vast, detailed analyses of NVIDIA, Anthropic and OpenAI’s

Ed Zitron's Where's Your Ed At

File under: AI Resistance

I'm reading – and enjoying immensely – @emilymbender and @alex's book #TheAICon.

I've been learning a lot of things and something that really stood out recently is the need to be careful about the language we use to describe these systems. Bender and Hanna helpfully explain:

"It matters what words we use when we talk about these technologies. For instance, in our writing, we don’t use the term “hallucination” to discuss the errors of LLMs, for two reasons. First, if it’s used tongue-in-cheek, it is making light of what can be symptoms of serious mental illness. Second,
“hallucination” refers to the experience of perceiving things that aren’t there. But LLMs actually don’t have perceptions, and suggesting that they do is yet more unhelpful anthropomorphization. That means we also avoid assigning thought processes to these systems, or saying that they can
“think”. Metaphors have power, they structure the frames of discourse, and they can subtly and insidiously encourage certain ways of understanding technology and the social systems it is embedded in."

Antropomorphizing AI contributes to AI hype. Thanks Emily and Alex for helping me see things this way!

#AIcritique #AIhype #NoAI #AIresistance #AI #books

> ... in the forum that followed The Chronicle’s labeling AI “a clear inflection point..” the only contributor.. to take the editors’ premise to task was #EmilyBender, the coauthor of.. #TheAICon... this #TechnologicalFad wasn’t “ a.. scientific breakthrough but rather the desperation of #TechCompanies. to recoup their massive investment in so-called AI.” By implication, university administrators (and presumably some higher education publications) have fallen for Silicon Valley’s misleading public-relations campaign hook, line, and sinker.
@[email protected]

RE: https://chaos.social/@epicenter_works/116492792687041985

This is exactly the scenario that @emilymbender and @alex have warned us about in their excellent book "The AI Con" (https://thecon.ai).

The book contains several examples where using stochastic parrots to "make" decisions has severely backfired.

Imho this book should be mandatory reading for anyone holding a public office.

#AtPol #TheAiCon #LLMs #Politics

In #technofeudalism and #antihumanism:

The narrative of #AI's “inevitability” is a tactic used by tech companies to discourage resistance and encourage compliance.

[…] When tech boosters want to demonise resistance, they invoke the luddites. By their telling, the luddites were primitive idiots, who smashed machines they were too stupid to understand. History though, tells a different story. As recounted by Brian Merchant’s sublime work Blood in the Machine, luddites were skilled artisans, fighting for their way of life against the “satanic mills” – textile sweatshops powered by child semi-slaves. Forbidden from unionising, luddites smashed machines as a protest tactic. And they did not lose to the inevitable march of progress. They lost to physical force. The government called in troops, and the luddites were either executed or shipped to penal colonies in Australia.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2026/apr/12/is-ai-the-greatest-art-heist-in-history

#technofeudalism #antihumanism #ai #promptingwithhitler #nerdreich #llm #theaicon #aihype #histodons

Is AI the greatest art heist in history?

New technologies of reproduction are plundering the art world – and getting away with it

The Guardian

The AI Great Leap Forward

Similar to the #Chinese Great Leap Forward's inflated grain production reports, companies are fabricating or exaggerating #AI adoption and productivity gains to please leadership, leading to increased investment based on made up numbers. The focus seem to have shifted from genuine AI development to "demoware" – impressive-looking prototypes and interfaces with little underlying validation, data infrastructure, or maintenance plans, creating future tech debt.

[…] Entire departments are stitching together n8n workflows and calling it AI — dozens of automated chains firing prompts into models, zero evaluation on any of them. These tools are merchants of complexity: they sell visual simplicity while generating spaghetti underneath. A drag-and-drop canvas makes it trivially easy to chain ten LLM calls together and impossibly hard to debug why the eighth one hallucinates on Tuesdays. The people building these workflows have never designed an evaluation pipeline, never measured model drift, never A/B tested a prompt. They don’t need to — the canvas looks clean, the arrows point forward, the green checkmarks fire. The complexity isn’t avoided. It’s hidden behind a GUI where nobody with ML expertise will ever look.

https://leehanchung.github.io/blogs/2026/04/05/the-ai-great-leap-forward/

#ai #aihype #theaicon #n8n

The AI Great Leap Forward

In 1958, Mao ordered every village to produce steel. The steel was useless. The crops rotted. Today's top-down AI mandates are producing the same pattern: ba...

Han, Not Solo

[...] “I think there’s a small but real chance he’s eventually remembered as a Bernie Madoff- or Sam Bankman-Fried-level scammer.”

Senior executive at #Microsoft about #OpenAI's Sam Altman.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/13/sam-altman-may-control-our-future-can-he-be-trusted or https://archive.ph/9jqJ7

#quitgpt https://quitgpt.org #llm #theaicon #aihype

Sam Altman May Control Our Future—Can He Be Trusted?

New interviews and closely guarded documents shed light on the persistent doubts about the head of OpenAI, Ronan Farrow and Andrew Marantz write.

The New Yorker

[…] Even if the accuracy problems were solved, and AI-generated summaries reliably captured all the essential points of a text, it would still be a bad idea to use them. Creating your own summaries is a crucial step in any literature study. When you read and summarize a text, you create the neural connections necessary to memorize and apply the information well in an exam, experiment, or research paper. Generating it with a click is a harmful form of cognitive offloading and will erode these skills. Writing it yourself will reveal the nuances of an academic text and allow you to register those elements that you deem essential to whatever you are working on. 

https://www.tue.nl/en/our-university/library/library-news/24-02-2026-are-ai-generated-summaries-suitable-for-studying-and-research

@darby3

#theaicon #aihype #llm

Are AI-generated summaries suitable for studying and research?

Despite didactic, ethical, and environmental concerns, the use of GenAI is on the rise in academia. For most applications, the jury is still out on whether and how they will benefit education and research in the long term. But it’s already safe to conclude that one popular use case is, in fact, a bad one: AI-generated summaries.