Perfect example of the Streisand Effect. I would never have seen this photo if it weren’t for this article.

I don’t think this is anything new, and it isn’t just in the Romantasy genre.

I recall listening to writing podcasts 10+ years ago where the writers were saying that what sells is first person stories. That most of the publishers weren’t interested in a book if it wasn’t in first person. This included genre’s like Mystery and Action / Adventure. The origin of this preference for first-person narratives seems to have been building for quite some time, and is now just being elevated by the current trends in publishing.

The long and short is that many readers these days are more interested in self-insert type of escapism than they are in actually reading a novel.

I am afraid that the actual art of reading has been, to a large degree, actually lost. What I mean by the “art of reading” is not the type of reading that determines if a person is literate – able to extract information from the text. No, I am talking about the higher levels of reading. The kind of reading that requires understanding the context of the work, the ability to read with the idea that literature is about more than the immediate aspects of the text, but is about perspectives and world-view, and how those fit into our understanding of the world.

But, this is the kind of reading that used to be obtained through study. The kind of study that typically required years of work to obtain Masters and Doctorates.

As t3rmit3@beehaw.org rightly points out, the trend towards “blockbuster” novels, and all the imitators of those novels has greatly watered down the publishing world to chasing the emerging trends that readers want.

My thinking is similar - that there are an overwhelming majority that are state actors. But, my guess is that in the non-state actor accounts it wouldn’t just be some accounts that got “swept up” as a side effect. I would be there would likely be some very noticeable targeting of certain types of accounts (ie, those that have social values that are more left leaning, or those that are trying to promote verifiable information that flies in the face of conservative narratives).

I would love to see an independent research team go through all the data from these 800m accounts, and determine which ones were actually state actors, and which were just accounts that Musk personally disagrees with.

That’s not the argument at all. The argument is that there have been warning signs, big flashing warning signs, about the dangers of using AI for years now. Most technology, in general doesn’t come with anywhere near as many warnings.

And, it’s been a known fact that people using AI are also training in the AI. That’s an active choice that people that signed up for accounts are making.

So yes, users of this technology are taking an active role in the training of the technology, that makes them complicit.

That is a far cry from data brokers going out and harvesting public records, or companies tracking your spending habits and feeding that into a database. If those companies then turned around and made a weapon, no I wouldn’t point the finger at people whose information got scraped. OTOH - if you continued to use a platform that you know is using you to gather information (aka, Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, etc.) and let them do it, then yeah…you have some level of complicity.

Making a mistake is one thing. Ignoring the BIG FLASHING WARNING SIGNS is another. There have been massive warning signs around AI for several years. If you looked at the warning signs and proceeded anyway, you deserve what you get.

That’s no judgment on me. I don’t use AI. I tried it one night 3-4 years ago, realized that it wasn’t ready for widespread adoption, and haven’t touched it since.

Yes, there are applications that can be used for good or evil. But being super reductive and claiming the whole internet has tons of negative uses is ridiculous. The internet itself is a series of protocols running on communications hardware.

It is up to the users of the applications to judge whether the application is inherently positive or negative, or whether the use of the technology is being handled in a positive and/or ethical manner. And more so, it’s up to the user to judge wether the technology aligns with their personal values.

Social networks: Xitter, Farcebook, Instawhore, TikTok, Reddit… all of them have proven they are platforms of manipulation, so I walked away. In fact, most of them I walked away from before it was shown how just how bad they were.

Cryptocurrencies: had the opportunity to be good, but grifters set in on them, so I never got involved.

NFTs: the next generation of CryptoGrifters, stayed away.

AI: has never been ready to be a public application / platform. That has been apparent for the last 3-5 years. If you didn’t read and pay attention to the signs and still signed up for an account despite all the warnings being out there, then yes, you have aided and abetted in the use of the technology in manners that are going to have a severely negative impact on the world.

Here’s the thing: we have a long, long history with technology. We know that it can be used for both good and bad. However, we also should have evolved in our thinking over the past 6-7 decades in terms of how technologies are being applied.

Nuclear reactors: Mostly good with negative side effects. Judgment on this needed longer terms study to understand it’s implication. Nuclear bombs? Clearly evil.

Cassette recorders, VCRs, CD Recorders: predominantly good, but open to bad uses (i.e., piracy). The balance: mostly good, minimal negative effects

AI? Potentially good, but immediately threw up huge red flags in terms of negative uses (deep fakes, revenge porn, etc.). Even AI researchers have expressed concerns over the direction of the research.

The thing is, technology is something that we’ve lived with since the industrial revolution. Every single technological invention since that time has had major implications for it’s impact on society. We can choose, on an individual basis, how that impact is shaped. If you chose to use a technology, then you are better that it’s uses will align with your values. Don’t cry when it’s used in ways that don’t align with your values, or is used against you.

Impossible purity test? That’s utter bull crap. There have been many warnings about the negative uses of AI for years now, for example: https://aiforgood.itu.int/event/addressing-the-dark-sides-of-ai/

To expect people to be able to understand that this use could be expanded to committing state sponsored atrocities is not a stretch.

Canceling now only means you are not continuing to contribute to the war atrocities that the technology is going to be used for. If you had an account and used it, you have already contributed.

Honestly - it’s too fucking late. Anyone who had an account with OpenAI and used that garbage is already an abbetor and/or accomplice to anything that is done by Hegseth and his henchmen.

If you don’t get a response to a pm, you could go to c/piefed_meta or c/piefed_help - most of the admins will be watching those communities.

Well, this is definitely a tactic that is a new form of bullying. Sounds like they’ve been trying this all along, and are using the subpoenas to try to quell dissent. Hopefully the recipients understand this and push back on them. It sounds like the DHS knows that these court orders will not stand up to scrutiny in court and folds at the slightest legal challenge.

But, shame of Meta, Google, et al. for folding so quickly. Another reason to get off, and stay off the commercial media garbage.

Well, that’s almost something…not really…but almost…

If we ever wanted more evidence that we’re allowing the racists to run ICE, we have it right here:

“After I was violently dragged from my car, I was put in the back of a car with three federal agents, where they laughed at me and told me this wouldn’t have happened if I was a ‘normal’ human being,” Rahman said.

That’s exactly the point - focus more on content and less on word count. But also, this tends to be more personal than about writing fiction.

I’m going to be posting a lengthy article about journaling that I am writing currently, along with the setup notes for TrackBear in the FediWriMo community later today, or possibly tomorrow.

And 72pt? Why so tiny? Go for 120pt or 240pt - you could type the word “and” and have three pages. 🤣 But all kidding aside, in the original post for this event I suggested for those using something like Obsidian or Notion (or any other non-paginating editor) they should probably use 300-350 words-per-page as a guideline.