agnesbookbinder.bsky.social
non sequitur
12,281 posts
1,517 followers
458 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
The thing that brings me some degree of comfort (not really, but I’ll take what I can get) is that, if their religious views are correct, they go to Hell, per Revelation. Absolutely guaranteed one-way ticket. Couldn’t happen to a better bunch.
comment in response to
post
So he’s fine with secession? Good to know.
comment in response to
post
It wasn’t a competition, but that sounds like it should be!
Dance offs are so 20th C. Now we just compare bums & call it good 😂
comment in response to
post
Whenever you get to swim, swim well!
comment in response to
post
That’s a wonderful way to put it.
comment in response to
post
Definitely!
comment in response to
post
Karma is a helluva thing.
comment in response to
post
This right here. If they’ll do it to them, they’ll do it to you.
comment in response to
post
You understand these two things are related, yes?
comment in response to
post
The guffaw I just let out! 😂
comment in response to
post
Not big on the firecrackers, though …
comment in response to
post
That’s not to say that every problem has a simple solution —not at all true.
But it is true that some of what’s being discussed & debated arises from flawed assumptions & underlying premises.
comment in response to
post
What happened?
comment in response to
post
Sorry. Not ask. Demand.
comment in response to
post
Wise. 🤢
comment in response to
post
It is literally a thought experiment. “What would you do if …?” They have shown that they are wholly inconsistent & unconcerned about the issue of life.
comment in response to
post
“Personal responsibility” or some sort of argument like that is the one they like to trot out when the system is actually set up against them. Lawsuit would make sense.
comment in response to
post
A concern that’s tangential to the one you brought up: overall literacy, including reading. You don’t need to learn to read if you take what’s being encouraged now to its natural conclusion (a ways away, but still there). The computer will do all of it for them, so don’t worry about it.
comment in response to
post
That’s fair. The thing is, & I believe this was your point, not everyone has that awareness or that background where they’ve already written a lot without that assistance. For learners, use would be disruptive to the process of learning because they don’t have that background.
comment in response to
post
It’s also hard to tell if people think it makes them better or more efficient. Your student mentioned both, I think you said. If they’re more concerned with the former, you can work with that; if it’s the latter & the latter only, you have problems. The obsession with efficiency is an issue.
comment in response to
post
No personhood for you, temporary uterus.
comment in response to
post
Emory should then sue the state. Then state should sue feds. If you’re going to mandate it, you need to pay —& it has very high costs, financial & otherwise.
comment in response to
post
Sounds like potential for a distorted placebo effect —it’s the person believing it helped them be a better writer. That could get them to write more, if they wrote then checked, but because of the nature of LLMs, they may completely bypass that & just turn all of their agency over to it instead.
comment in response to
post
I think I tend to be lumped into the refuser crowd and I lean this way not because I deny the utility of the tool in some cases, but because of the nature of the systems in which the tool is being introduced and the foreseeable harms of those things intersecting.
comment in response to
post
Maybe not. Church isn’t happy. They don’t air their stuff in public like this normally.