Navya
@tnotherthoughts.bsky.social
Law+Policy @StanfordLaw, @JindalGLS. Rambling about tech, tea and AI Gov in the majority world.
Palo Alto/India.
Palo Alto/India.
"The policy wonks here are big on fuzzy concepts like “multi-stakeholder engagement” and “innovation-enabling frameworks.” But few are thinking seriously about what would happen if smarter-than-human A.I. systems were to arrive in a matter of months, or asking the right follow-up questions."
5 Notes from the Big Paris A.I. Summit
At times, Kevin Roose writes, it feels like he is watching policymakers on horseback trying to install seatbelts on a passing Lamborghini.
www.nytimes.com
February 10, 2025 at 11:20 PM
"The policy wonks here are big on fuzzy concepts like “multi-stakeholder engagement” and “innovation-enabling frameworks.” But few are thinking seriously about what would happen if smarter-than-human A.I. systems were to arrive in a matter of months, or asking the right follow-up questions."
Reposted by Navya
Don Ray Ramos for @techpolicypress.bsky.social, December 2024.
January 19, 2025 at 3:34 PM
Don Ray Ramos for @techpolicypress.bsky.social, December 2024.
Reposted by Navya
The most absurd thing about this whole brouhaha is no one—not even Tik Tok—calls on Congress to amend or repeal the dumb law it made. It’s just the president or the courts who can act now, in literally every prominent voice’s conception.
Just in: TikTok says it plans to shut itself down Sunday unless Biden publicly pledges non-enforcement. TikTok wants everyone to be sure Biden is to blame, which conveniently also curries favor with Trump.
January 18, 2025 at 2:19 AM
The most absurd thing about this whole brouhaha is no one—not even Tik Tok—calls on Congress to amend or repeal the dumb law it made. It’s just the president or the courts who can act now, in literally every prominent voice’s conception.
Reposted by Navya
I wouldn’t have known about any of this without RedNote
January 16, 2025 at 3:22 PM
I wouldn’t have known about any of this without RedNote
Reposted by Navya
Contrary to common beliefs, we find that misinformation isn’t universal or a general condition of our media ecosystem.
Instead, it's specifically associated with radical-right populist parties that spread misinformation as a political strategy. 5/
Instead, it's specifically associated with radical-right populist parties that spread misinformation as a political strategy. 5/
January 14, 2025 at 1:24 PM
Contrary to common beliefs, we find that misinformation isn’t universal or a general condition of our media ecosystem.
Instead, it's specifically associated with radical-right populist parties that spread misinformation as a political strategy. 5/
Instead, it's specifically associated with radical-right populist parties that spread misinformation as a political strategy. 5/
Reposted by Navya
I don't know how many of y'all are watching the migration of American TikTokers to RedNote, but it's the most fascinating thing I've EVER SEEN HAPPEN ONLINE.
🧵
🧵
January 14, 2025 at 2:50 PM
I don't know how many of y'all are watching the migration of American TikTokers to RedNote, but it's the most fascinating thing I've EVER SEEN HAPPEN ONLINE.
🧵
🧵
Reposted by Navya
5. Most of Meta's US-based moderation staff was already in TX, so unless they also move the core product teams who work on trust & safety, this is no change. If those teams are staying in CA, this indicates Meta wants to position T&S as separate from core product mechanics-- a dangerous delusion!
January 7, 2025 at 5:43 PM
5. Most of Meta's US-based moderation staff was already in TX, so unless they also move the core product teams who work on trust & safety, this is no change. If those teams are staying in CA, this indicates Meta wants to position T&S as separate from core product mechanics-- a dangerous delusion!
Reposted by Navya
In my view, that doesn't make much sense from any principled point of view. If you were primarily concerned with "free speech" you'd go *further* than they have, while if you were only concerned with ensuring you don't interfere with legislative debates you'd go *much less far*. 🧵 5/6
January 12, 2025 at 7:14 PM
In my view, that doesn't make much sense from any principled point of view. If you were primarily concerned with "free speech" you'd go *further* than they have, while if you were only concerned with ensuring you don't interfere with legislative debates you'd go *much less far*. 🧵 5/6
Reposted by Navya
Folks are mostly missing the forest for the trees re: the recent Meta announcement. Specifically, the focus on the move from fact checking to community notes. There two different changes that are a much bigger deal that have received less focus. 🧵 1/11
January 9, 2025 at 8:29 PM
Folks are mostly missing the forest for the trees re: the recent Meta announcement. Specifically, the focus on the move from fact checking to community notes. There two different changes that are a much bigger deal that have received less focus. 🧵 1/11
Reposted by Navya
I want to call attention to the next paragraph, implying that a laissez faire government and media would allow "society" to simply work out its differences. This is actually the third exec I've heard say something like this in recent weeks, so I'm convinced it's an internal talking point 1/7
This top Facebook executive thinks that before Roe v Wade, abortion wasn't a politicized issue. www.nytimes.com/2025/01/10/t...
January 10, 2025 at 11:42 PM
I want to call attention to the next paragraph, implying that a laissez faire government and media would allow "society" to simply work out its differences. This is actually the third exec I've heard say something like this in recent weeks, so I'm convinced it's an internal talking point 1/7