kfullagar.bsky.social
Historian of modern empire & Indigenous resistance š¦šŗ History advocate. VP of https://theaha.org.au/ FAHA FRHistS. Professor at ACU. Latest book Bennelong & Phillip https://rb.gy/vebj23 My website is katefullagar.com
394 posts
9,369 followers
2,811 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Please realize they're testing the waters here. If they succeed with this bullshit against Mamdani, they'll unleash it against everyone.
De-naturalization. We've been screaming about this. They start with persecuting undocumented immigrants. Then any immigrants. Then anyone at all to their left.
comment in response to
post
Yeah but did the previous model have five appropriately matched hues in teardrop shapes?! I donāt think so.
comment in response to
post
Yeah well obviously the publisher. They are proud of her:)
comment in response to
post
The ABC spent millions defending this Lattouf case. The Creative Australia chair resigned. The Melbourne Symphony Orchestra had its worst financial result in a long time. The SLV and SLQ are still dealing with the fallout from their cowardice.
It doesn't pay to betray your own principles and values.
comment in response to
post
Good god. N
comment in response to
post
Fran Liebowitz:
āEveryone says he is crazy ā which maybe he is ā but the scarier thing about him is that he is stupid. You do not know anyone as stupid as Donald Trump. You just donāt.ā
comment in response to
post
This. Posted 1000 times.
comment in response to
post
It will not be trumpās face that it blows up in. It will obvs cost us all horribly. But he wont see the backlash. He never does. And nor will his supporters.
comment in response to
post
One Iād support tbh.
comment in response to
post
Itās just a war with JDās dick.
comment in response to
post
Mass media doing what it always does: manufacturing consent.
comment in response to
post
yes, don't! However ANU got the date wrong - it's 23 July:)
comment in response to
post
Ugh. Thatās awful. The convos with the colleagues who use AI themselves also suck ! They all might be contrite when there are simplyā¦ less students.
comment in response to
post
I agree tho I think the majority of the discourse against AI is directed to the developers. Not the students? No one can blame students when usage among own colleagues is rife.
comment in response to
post
Really?! (I do not ask facetiously) That other industries, eg federal govts, will give it up? Moocs seemed like a brain fart; AI infiltrates most white collar work already.
comment in response to
post
How so? (I donāt ask challengingly, Iām just curious). The content or the argument/style?
comment in response to
post
Agree. I deeply resent being in a timeline where my professional love is dying. And I canāt really imagine what will even be the profession. Tho being a historian I guess I assume that something will survive.
comment in response to
post
The authorās point about making present work eventually look ātoo expensiveā resonates. We already know that how academic historians worked in say 1950s (time, typists etc) is impossible now.
comment in response to
post
Iām super interested in this articleās commentary. I think the leaps we are making including asking WHO will pay for historians to do āpainstakingā work when there are no students and no real value placed on that work? Itās more kind of meta than a choice to rejectā¦ thatās my anxiety anyway.
comment in response to
post
š
comment in response to
post
I don't even live in your country and this is exhausting
comment in response to
post
Yes. This.
comment in response to
post
For eg I've read many historians on here saying 'i'm not reading that garbage because we should bin AI; I personally love my dust-coasted process etc'. I mean sames, but that's not to engage with this threat, which repeats some previous threats in a way (tho worse; uni hist. won't survive i think).
comment in response to
post
Yes, I was addressing the 'commentary' Ive read by all. That's cool but did we defend against indexing and digitisation which are also forms of 'cheating'. That's just the hist. pt he's making. Definitions change & we did not arrive at the pure form before AI. I say this as someone who loathes AI
comment in response to
post
Iām not defending AI. I loathe what it has done to my teaching career. Ie destroy it, pretty much. But itās HERE. And derision/dismissal only is a super antihistorical thing to do. The author here made historically informed pts! Fin.
comment in response to
post
Opened research to those who donāt have sabbaticals and huge grants or do have publishing pressure. Made it all a bit less in some ways than it was. 3
comment in response to
post
Do I wish theyād read my careful narrative from start to end? Yes. Will they do so? Doubtful, as I might skim theirs. The author here also makes a great pt about what search functions did to history. Helped a lot. But reduced a lot. 2.
comment in response to
post
This is kind of at the nub of things here ? I mean the authorās point about the search functions for historians was extremely apt. It did reduce history. But also gave some without massive sabbaticals etc the ability to work. AI summaries will soon look like that. (Iām not defending it)