Petition to get you a used Honda Accord just so you can break off the "Honda" and put a bumper sticker that says "I'm old enough to remember the Meech Lake" in front of it

alternatively i'm gonna say that some 2001 albums (Tool's Lateralus, Creed's Weathered) also go pretty hard for that angst, you know, real 2001

do you need to cry it out to Hilary Duff's Coming Clean (2003)?

Important response to the lawsuit. Chief Clarence Louie: “The recognition of unceded Syilx Okanagan land is not a political maneuver; it is an acknowledgment of historical truths & legal realities. Attempts to silence these acknowledgments are attempts to erase Syilx Okanagan presence & rights.” 14/

i think this break is badly needed. i'm not saying CS has no place in refusing, resisting, or destroying AI, but they must have due respect for the people who actually have to deal with the violence and harm that AIs create & project. meaning recognizing undue power they wield and challenging that

recognizing AI as an oligarchic project, or as an authoritarian one (or, fundamentally, as a political project, navigating our way through which particular qualities that project entails), means breaking away from letting computer scientists insist on being the chaperones of our movements against AI

i would lay out the claim that the connective tissue within AI, that spans those last 60ish years, is not shared methods or shared approaches. the thing that connects AI from the 50s/60s to today is the shared ideological project.

i've said this a few times now so i'm sorry if i'm a broken record, but

if you go back in time 30 years, you find AI in a very different form than it exists today. go back another 30 years, and again something very different. the academic tradition that falls under that one umbrella is disjointed;

what does it mean to have systems that render decisions at scales that are de facto or de jure impossible to scrutinize or challenge? again, are we not talking about authoritarian totalitarian states?

we can and should be candid about what it means if someone says that they want to accumulate and centralize (and therefore validate or invalidate) the entire world in the form of data. what does that kind of central authority describe? on its face we're describing systems of authoritarian nature.

one key point that i'll try to make without succumbing to engaging on technical domain shit is that AI projects as we know them today are existentially, definitionally characterized by a massive amount of data, and opaque decisions and other outputs going out.

but i promise i'll try not to constantly turn every conversation into an epistemological crisis about what kind of expertise, and what kind of knowledge, we respect and acknowledge.

BUT WE SHOULD- no, i'm digressing.

should put "technical" experts in so many quotes because i would argue that people who have had to fill out a thousand job application forms online arguably have more *expertise* about AI in job screenings & applications than eg CS faculty and grad students who haven't applied for a job in 10+ years

it's really good to be re-evaluating whether we accept the premises laid out by (technical) experts when they define "AI". the techno-essentialist approach to tracing a boundary around AI according to the tech stack has led us into weird cul-de-sacs that make building power against it more difficult

I show up on these bluest of skies just to be So Helpful in your Time of Need.

Too young to know how to blow into it like a video game cartridge.