1st meeting of China-US economic and trade consultation mechanism in London achieves new progress in addressing each other's concerns
1st meeting of China-US economic and trade consultation mechanism in London achieves new progress in addressing each other's concerns
The first meeting of the China-US economic and trade consultation mechanism that was held in London led to new progress in addressing each other's economic and trade concerns, China's state broadcaster CCTV reported on Wednesday.www.globaltimes.cn
Wikipedia Pauses AI-Generated Summaries After Editor Backlash
Text to avoid paywall
The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization which hosts and develops Wikipedia, has paused an experiment that showed users AI-generated summaries at the top of articles after an overwhelmingly negative reaction from the Wikipedia editors community.
“Just because Google has rolled out its AI summaries doesn't mean we need to one-up them, I sincerely beg you not to test this, on mobile or anywhere else,” one editor said in response to Wikimedia Foundation’s announcement that it will launch a two-week trial of the summaries on the mobile version of Wikipedia. “This would do immediate and irreversible harm to our readers and to our reputation as a decently trustworthy and serious source. Wikipedia has in some ways become a byword for sober boringness, which is excellent. Let's not insult our readers' intelligence and join the stampede to roll out flashy AI summaries. Which is what these are, although here the word ‘machine-generated’ is used instead.”
Two other editors simply commented, “Yuck.”
For years, Wikipedia has been one of the most valuable repositories of information in the world, and a laudable model for community-based, democratic internet platform governance. Its importance has only grown in the last couple of years during the generative AI boom as it’s one of the only internet platforms that has not been significantly degraded by the flood of AI-generated slop and misinformation. As opposed to Google, which since embracing generative AI has instructed its users to eat glue, Wikipedia’s community has kept its articles relatively high quality. As I recently reported last year, editors are actively working to filter out bad, AI-generated content from Wikipedia.
A page detailing the the AI-generated summaries project, called “Simple Article Summaries,” explains that it was proposed after a discussion at Wikimedia’s 2024 conference, Wikimania, where “Wikimedians discussed ways that AI/machine-generated remixing of the already created content can be used to make Wikipedia more accessible and easier to learn from.” Editors who participated in the discussion thought that these summaries could improve the learning experience on Wikipedia, where some article summaries can be quite dense and filled with technical jargon, but that AI features needed to be cleared labeled as such and that users needed an easy to way to flag issues with “machine-generated/remixed content once it was published or generated automatically.”
In one experiment where summaries were enabled for users who have the Wikipedia browser extension installed, the generated summary showed up at the top of the article, which users had to click to expand and read. That summary was also flagged with a yellow “unverified” label.
An example of what the AI-generated summary looked like.
Wikimedia announced that it was going to run the generated summaries experiment on June 2, and was immediately met with dozens of replies from editors who said “very bad idea,” “strongest possible oppose,” Absolutely not,” etc.
“Yes, human editors can introduce reliability and NPOV [neutral point-of-view] issues. But as a collective mass, it evens out into a beautiful corpus,” one editor said. “With Simple Article Summaries, you propose giving one singular editor with known reliability and NPOV issues a platform at the very top of any given article, whilst giving zero editorial control to others. It reinforces the idea that Wikipedia cannot be relied on, destroying a decade of policy work. It reinforces the belief that unsourced, charged content can be added, because this platforms it. I don't think I would feel comfortable contributing to an encyclopedia like this. No other community has mastered collaboration to such a wondrous extent, and this would throw that away.”
A day later, Wikimedia announced that it would pause the launch of the experiment, but indicated that it’s still interested in AI-generated summaries.
“The Wikimedia Foundation has been exploring ways to make Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects more accessible to readers globally,” a Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson told me in an email. “This two-week, opt-in experiment was focused on making complex Wikipedia articles more accessible to people with different reading levels. For the purposes of this experiment, the summaries were generated by an open-weight Aya model by Cohere. It was meant to gauge interest in a feature like this, and to help us think about the right kind of community moderation systems to ensure humans remain central to deciding what information is shown on Wikipedia.”
“It is common to receive a variety of feedback from volunteers, and we incorporate it in our decisions, and sometimes change course,” the Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson added. “We welcome such thoughtful feedback — this is what continues to make Wikipedia a truly collaborative platform of human knowledge.”
“Reading through the comments, it’s clear we could have done a better job introducing this idea and opening up the conversation here on VPT back in March,” a Wikimedia Foundation project manager said. VPT, or “village pump technical,” is where The Wikimedia Foundation and the community discuss technical aspects of the platform. “As internet usage changes over time, we are trying to discover new ways to help new generations learn from Wikipedia to sustain our movement into the future. In consequence, we need to figure out how we can experiment in safe ways that are appropriate for readers and the Wikimedia community. Looking back, we realize the next step with this message should have been to provide more of that context for you all and to make the space for folks to engage further.”
The project manager also said that “Bringing generative AI into the Wikipedia reading experience is a serious set of decisions, with important implications, and we intend to treat it as such, and that “We do not have any plans for bringing a summary feature to the wikis without editor involvement. An editor moderation workflow is required under any circumstances, both for this idea, as well as any future idea around AI summarized or adapted content.”
Wikipedia Pauses AI-Generated Summaries After Editor Backlash
The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization which hosts and develops Wikipedia, has paused an experiment that showed users AI-generated summaries at the top of articles after an overwhelmingly negative reaction from the Wikipedia editors community.“Just because Google has rolled out its AI summaries doesn't mean we need to one-up them, I sincerely beg you not to test this, on mobile or anywhere else,” one editor said in response to Wikimedia Foundation’s announcement that it will launch a two-week trial of the summaries on the mobile version of Wikipedia. “This would do immediate and irreversible harm to our readers and to our reputation as a decently trustworthy and serious source. Wikipedia has in some ways become a byword for sober boringness, which is excellent. Let's not insult our readers' intelligence and join the stampede to roll out flashy AI summaries. Which is what these are, although here the word ‘machine-generated’ is used instead.”
Two other editors simply commented, “Yuck.”
For years, Wikipedia has been one of the most valuable repositories of information in the world, and a laudable model for community-based, democratic internet platform governance. Its importance has only grown in the last couple of years during the generative AI boom as it’s one of the only internet platforms that has not been significantly degraded by the flood of AI-generated slop and misinformation. As opposed to Google, which since embracing generative AI has instructed its users to eat glue, Wikipedia’s community has kept its articles relatively high quality. As I recently reported last year, editors are actively working to filter out bad, AI-generated content from Wikipedia.
A page detailing the the AI-generated summaries project, called “Simple Article Summaries,” explains that it was proposed after a discussion at Wikimedia’s 2024 conference, Wikimania, where “Wikimedians discussed ways that AI/machine-generated remixing of the already created content can be used to make Wikipedia more accessible and easier to learn from.” Editors who participated in the discussion thought that these summaries could improve the learning experience on Wikipedia, where some article summaries can be quite dense and filled with technical jargon, but that AI features needed to be cleared labeled as such and that users needed an easy to way to flag issues with “machine-generated/remixed content once it was published or generated automatically.”
In one experiment where summaries were enabled for users who have the Wikipedia browser extension installed, the generated summary showed up at the top of the article, which users had to click to expand and read. That summary was also flagged with a yellow “unverified” label.
An example of what the AI-generated summary looked like.
Wikimedia announced that it was going to run the generated summaries experiment on June 2, and was immediately met with dozens of replies from editors who said “very bad idea,” “strongest possible oppose,” Absolutely not,” etc.“Yes, human editors can introduce reliability and NPOV [neutral point-of-view] issues. But as a collective mass, it evens out into a beautiful corpus,” one editor said. “With Simple Article Summaries, you propose giving one singular editor with known reliability and NPOV issues a platform at the very top of any given article, whilst giving zero editorial control to others. It reinforces the idea that Wikipedia cannot be relied on, destroying a decade of policy work. It reinforces the belief that unsourced, charged content can be added, because this platforms it. I don't think I would feel comfortable contributing to an encyclopedia like this. No other community has mastered collaboration to such a wondrous extent, and this would throw that away.”
A day later, Wikimedia announced that it would pause the launch of the experiment, but indicated that it’s still interested in AI-generated summaries.
“The Wikimedia Foundation has been exploring ways to make Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects more accessible to readers globally,” a Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson told me in an email. “This two-week, opt-in experiment was focused on making complex Wikipedia articles more accessible to people with different reading levels. For the purposes of this experiment, the summaries were generated by an open-weight Aya model by Cohere. It was meant to gauge interest in a feature like this, and to help us think about the right kind of community moderation systems to ensure humans remain central to deciding what information is shown on Wikipedia.”
“It is common to receive a variety of feedback from volunteers, and we incorporate it in our decisions, and sometimes change course,” the Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson added. “We welcome such thoughtful feedback — this is what continues to make Wikipedia a truly collaborative platform of human knowledge.”
“Reading through the comments, it’s clear we could have done a better job introducing this idea and opening up the conversation here on VPT back in March,” a Wikimedia Foundation project manager said. VPT, or “village pump technical,” is where The Wikimedia Foundation and the community discuss technical aspects of the platform. “As internet usage changes over time, we are trying to discover new ways to help new generations learn from Wikipedia to sustain our movement into the future. In consequence, we need to figure out how we can experiment in safe ways that are appropriate for readers and the Wikimedia community. Looking back, we realize the next step with this message should have been to provide more of that context for you all and to make the space for folks to engage further.”
The project manager also said that “Bringing generative AI into the Wikipedia reading experience is a serious set of decisions, with important implications, and we intend to treat it as such, and that “We do not have any plans for bringing a summary feature to the wikis without editor involvement. An editor moderation workflow is required under any circumstances, both for this idea, as well as any future idea around AI summarized or adapted content.”
The Editors Protecting Wikipedia from AI Hoaxes
WikiProject AI Cleanup is protecting Wikipedia from the same kind of misleading AI-generated information that has plagued the rest of the internet.Emanuel Maiberg (404 Media)
like this
Technology reshared this.
Ghostty in review: how's the new terminal emulator?
A few months ago, a new terminal emulator was released. It's called ghostty, and it has been a highly anticipated terminal emulator for a while, especially due to the coverage that it received from ThePrimeagen, who had been using for a while, while it was in private beta.
like this
It's astonishing that Scientific American is having to publish an article on How Not To Be Killed By The Police, but here it is
How to Protect Yourself during Protests
Demonstrators face tear gas, flash bangs, coronavirus and surveillanceKaren Kwon (Scientific American)
Tech Deadline 2025 - leave big tech!
Please help promote the hashtags #Deadline2025, #BigTechWalkout2025 and #Reclaim2025 to reach those still using big tech platforms.
And share this great video that a friend of mine made showing how lame the big techbros really are.
If we starve big tech of data, their power diminishes.
- YouTube
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.www.youtube.com
like this
Israel’s War on Reproduction in Gaza
The single explosion destroyed more than 4,000 embryos and over 1,000 vials of sperm and unfertilized eggs. Dr Bahaeldeen Ghalayini, the obstetrician who established the clinic, summed up the implications of the attack in an interview with Reuters: “5,000 lives in one shell.”The strike was an act of reprocide: the systematic targeting of a community’s reproductive health with the intention of eliminating their future. In the context of Israel’s ongoing genocidal war in Gaza, reprocide serves as a tactic. Indeed, genocide includes its definition, “imposing measures intended to prevent births” within a particular national, ethnic or religious group.
The bombing of the IVF clinic was one spectacular example, but as a Palestinian women’s rights activist from Gaza, I have lived and witnessed how Israel uses reprocide within a settler colonial framework that seeks not only territorial domination but demographic erasure—a process that began long before October 7, 2023.
When I was 15 years old, following the Israeli assault on Gaza in 2008–2009, Israeli soldiers began wearing and distributing t-shirts that depicted a pregnant woman in crosshairs above the slogan “1 Shot 2 Kills.” I recall the fear felt by the pregnant women I knew. The t-shirts prompted people around me to recount stories of pregnant women being killed or wounded during other moments of extreme violence in Palestinian history, from the start of the Nakba in 1948 to the Sabra and Shatila massacres in 1982. Underscoring the eliminationist nature of this violence, Israel remains among the world’s leaders in assisted reproduction technology, actively encouraging birth rates among Jewish citizens.
In an effort to trace the effects of reprocide amid Israel’s ongoing genocidal war, between October 2023 and October 2024, I collected ethnographic evidence—voice notes, text messages, emails and phone calls—from those enduring or witnessing reproductive violence. Analyzing their accounts alongside official reports from Gaza reveals the many ways Israel has weaponized reproduction, some more obvious than others: from the direct assaults on reproductive health and infrastructure to the conditions it forces women and men to reproduce under to sexual violence and its role in reproductive erasure.
Israel’s War on Reproduction in Gaza - MERIP
Hala Shoman reports on reprocide as a tactic of eliminationist violence.Marya Hannun (MERIP)
adhocfungus likes this.
Are Arch Linux repos in California being blocked?
The image shows the log of a system update in Arch Linux. Several US mirrors are skipped with error 404, until pacman finds a Canadian mirror to download packages.
It is not happening to every californian mirrors (I'm testing all US mirrors), but it's definitely happening to a lot of them, from Mexico. Is this collateral to what's happening in LA or is it mandated by the government? Do you know anything?
Israel’s War on Reproduction in Gaza
The single explosion destroyed more than 4,000 embryos and over 1,000 vials of sperm and unfertilized eggs. Dr Bahaeldeen Ghalayini, the obstetrician who established the clinic, summed up the implications of the attack in an interview with Reuters: “5,000 lives in one shell.”The strike was an act of reprocide: the systematic targeting of a community’s reproductive health with the intention of eliminating their future. In the context of Israel’s ongoing genocidal war in Gaza, reprocide serves as a tactic. Indeed, genocide includes its definition, “imposing measures intended to prevent births” within a particular national, ethnic or religious group.
The bombing of the IVF clinic was one spectacular example, but as a Palestinian women’s rights activist from Gaza, I have lived and witnessed how Israel uses reprocide within a settler colonial framework that seeks not only territorial domination but demographic erasure—a process that began long before October 7, 2023.
When I was 15 years old, following the Israeli assault on Gaza in 2008–2009, Israeli soldiers began wearing and distributing t-shirts that depicted a pregnant woman in crosshairs above the slogan “1 Shot 2 Kills.” I recall the fear felt by the pregnant women I knew. The t-shirts prompted people around me to recount stories of pregnant women being killed or wounded during other moments of extreme violence in Palestinian history, from the start of the Nakba in 1948 to the Sabra and Shatila massacres in 1982. Underscoring the eliminationist nature of this violence, Israel remains among the world’s leaders in assisted reproduction technology, actively encouraging birth rates among Jewish citizens.
In an effort to trace the effects of reprocide amid Israel’s ongoing genocidal war, between October 2023 and October 2024, I collected ethnographic evidence—voice notes, text messages, emails and phone calls—from those enduring or witnessing reproductive violence. Analyzing their accounts alongside official reports from Gaza reveals the many ways Israel has weaponized reproduction, some more obvious than others: from the direct assaults on reproductive health and infrastructure to the conditions it forces women and men to reproduce under to sexual violence and its role in reproductive erasure.
Israel’s War on Reproduction in Gaza - MERIP
Hala Shoman reports on reprocide as a tactic of eliminationist violence.Marya Hannun (MERIP)
Israel’s War on Reproduction in Gaza
The single explosion destroyed more than 4,000 embryos and over 1,000 vials of sperm and unfertilized eggs. Dr Bahaeldeen Ghalayini, the obstetrician who established the clinic, summed up the implications of the attack in an interview with Reuters: “5,000 lives in one shell.”The strike was an act of reprocide: the systematic targeting of a community’s reproductive health with the intention of eliminating their future. In the context of Israel’s ongoing genocidal war in Gaza, reprocide serves as a tactic. Indeed, genocide includes its definition, “imposing measures intended to prevent births” within a particular national, ethnic or religious group.
The bombing of the IVF clinic was one spectacular example, but as a Palestinian women’s rights activist from Gaza, I have lived and witnessed how Israel uses reprocide within a settler colonial framework that seeks not only territorial domination but demographic erasure—a process that began long before October 7, 2023.
When I was 15 years old, following the Israeli assault on Gaza in 2008–2009, Israeli soldiers began wearing and distributing t-shirts that depicted a pregnant woman in crosshairs above the slogan “1 Shot 2 Kills.” I recall the fear felt by the pregnant women I knew. The t-shirts prompted people around me to recount stories of pregnant women being killed or wounded during other moments of extreme violence in Palestinian history, from the start of the Nakba in 1948 to the Sabra and Shatila massacres in 1982. Underscoring the eliminationist nature of this violence, Israel remains among the world’s leaders in assisted reproduction technology, actively encouraging birth rates among Jewish citizens.
In an effort to trace the effects of reprocide amid Israel’s ongoing genocidal war, between October 2023 and October 2024, I collected ethnographic evidence—voice notes, text messages, emails and phone calls—from those enduring or witnessing reproductive violence. Analyzing their accounts alongside official reports from Gaza reveals the many ways Israel has weaponized reproduction, some more obvious than others: from the direct assaults on reproductive health and infrastructure to the conditions it forces women and men to reproduce under to sexual violence and its role in reproductive erasure.
Israel’s War on Reproduction in Gaza - MERIP
Hala Shoman reports on reprocide as a tactic of eliminationist violence.Marya Hannun (MERIP)
Israel’s War on Reproduction in Gaza
The single explosion destroyed more than 4,000 embryos and over 1,000 vials of sperm and unfertilized eggs. Dr Bahaeldeen Ghalayini, the obstetrician who established the clinic, summed up the implications of the attack in an interview with Reuters: “5,000 lives in one shell.”The strike was an act of reprocide: the systematic targeting of a community’s reproductive health with the intention of eliminating their future. In the context of Israel’s ongoing genocidal war in Gaza, reprocide serves as a tactic. Indeed, genocide includes its definition, “imposing measures intended to prevent births” within a particular national, ethnic or religious group.
The bombing of the IVF clinic was one spectacular example, but as a Palestinian women’s rights activist from Gaza, I have lived and witnessed how Israel uses reprocide within a settler colonial framework that seeks not only territorial domination but demographic erasure—a process that began long before October 7, 2023.
When I was 15 years old, following the Israeli assault on Gaza in 2008–2009, Israeli soldiers began wearing and distributing t-shirts that depicted a pregnant woman in crosshairs above the slogan “1 Shot 2 Kills.” I recall the fear felt by the pregnant women I knew. The t-shirts prompted people around me to recount stories of pregnant women being killed or wounded during other moments of extreme violence in Palestinian history, from the start of the Nakba in 1948 to the Sabra and Shatila massacres in 1982. Underscoring the eliminationist nature of this violence, Israel remains among the world’s leaders in assisted reproduction technology, actively encouraging birth rates among Jewish citizens.
In an effort to trace the effects of reprocide amid Israel’s ongoing genocidal war, between October 2023 and October 2024, I collected ethnographic evidence—voice notes, text messages, emails and phone calls—from those enduring or witnessing reproductive violence. Analyzing their accounts alongside official reports from Gaza reveals the many ways Israel has weaponized reproduction, some more obvious than others: from the direct assaults on reproductive health and infrastructure to the conditions it forces women and men to reproduce under to sexual violence and its role in reproductive erasure.
Israel’s War on Reproduction in Gaza - MERIP
Hala Shoman reports on reprocide as a tactic of eliminationist violence.Marya Hannun (MERIP)
OpenAI's o3-pro is much smarter than o3 and amazing at using tools, but the model requires a lot of context to run well and without enough it tends to overthink
God is hungry for Context: First thoughts on o3 pro
OpenAI dropped o3 pricing 80% today and launched o3-pro. Ben Hylak of Raindrop.ai returns with the world's first early review.Ben Hylak (Latent.Space)
Swiss probe intelligence leaks to Russia
Swiss probe intelligence leaks to Russia
Switzerland's defence ministry has launched an investigation into leaks from the country's intelligence service to Russia's military intelligence, the Swiss news agency Keystone-ATS reported Wednesday.France 24 (FRANCE 24)
Man who tried to smuggle £1.2m in suitcases out of UK jailed
A man who tried to smuggle £1.2m in suitcases out of the United Kingdom to Lebanon has been jailed for 21 months, following a National Crime Agency investigation.
C is one of the most energy saving language
cross-posted from: lemmy.world/post/31184895
cross-posted from: lemmy.world/post/31184706
C is one of the top languages in terms of speed, memory and energy
Engineer’s Codex (@engineerscodex) on Threads
Python consumes 76 times more energy and is 72 times slower than C. https://haslab.github.io/SAFER/scp21.pdfThreads
A quantum leap: Chinese institute begins photonic chip production
Tech war: Chinese institute begins photonic chip production despite US curbs
Photonic chips are a critical hardware component for quantum computing and high-speed optical communications.Ann Cao (South China Morning Post)
HP reveals $24,999 hardware created just for Google Beam
HP reveals $24,999 hardware created just for Google Beam
HP has revealed the first third-party hardware built using Google’s 3D video conferencing technology, Beam. The HP Dimension costs $24,999 and features a 65-inch light field display to create a “true-to-life” 3D video of your caller.Emma Roth (The Verge)
With a Trump-driven reduction of nearly 2,000 employees, F.D.A. will Use A.I. in Drug Approvals to ‘Radically Increase Efficiency’
Text to avoid paywall
The Food and Drug Administration is planning to use artificial intelligence to “radically increase efficiency” in deciding whether to approve new drugs and devices, one of several top priorities laid out in an article published Tuesday in JAMA.
Another initiative involves a review of chemicals and other “concerning ingredients” that appear in U.S. food but not in the food of other developed nations. And officials want to speed up the final stages of making a drug or medical device approval decision to mere weeks, citing the success of Operation Warp Speed during the Covid pandemic when workers raced to curb a spiraling death count.
“The F.D.A. will be focused on delivering faster cures and meaningful treatments for patients, especially those with neglected and rare diseases, healthier food for children and common-sense approaches to rebuild the public trust,” Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, who leads the division that oversees vaccines and gene therapy, wrote in the JAMA article.
The agency plays a central role in pursuing the agenda of the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and it has already begun to press food makers to eliminate artificial food dyes. The new road map also underscores the Trump administration’s efforts to smooth the way for major industries with an array of efforts aimed at getting products to pharmacies and store shelves quickly.
Some aspects of the proposals outlined in JAMA were met with skepticism, particularly the idea that artificial intelligence is up to the task of shearing months or years from the painstaking work of examining applications that companies submit when seeking approval for a drug or high-risk medical device.
“I don’t want to be dismissive of speeding reviews at the F.D.A.,” said Stephen Holland, a lawyer who formerly advised the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on health care. “I think that there is great potential here, but I’m not seeing the beef yet.”
F.D.A. to Use A.I. in Drug Approvals to ‘Radically Increase Efficiency’
With a Trump-driven reduction of nearly 2,000 employees, agency officials view artificial intelligence as a way to speed drugs to the market.Christina Jewett (The New York Times)
like this
Technology reshared this.
If it actually ends up being an AI and not just some Trump cuck stooge masquerading as AI picking the drug by the company that gave the largest bribe to Trump, I 100% guarantee this AI is trained only on papers written by non-peer reviewed drug company paid "scientists" containing made up narratives.
Those of us prescribed the drugs will be the guinea pigs because R&D costs money and hits the bottom line. The many deaths will be conveniently scape-goated on "the AI" the morons in charge promised is smarter and more efficient than a person.
Fuck this shit.
The bottom 50% in China has double the average net worth of the bottom 50% in the US. This is despite China having 1/3rd of the GDP per capita (adjusted for purchasing power) of the US.
Share - WID - World Inequality Database
Share The source for global inequality data. Open access, high quality wealth and income inequality data developed by an international academic consortium.WID - Wealth and Income Database
adhocfungus likes this.
A Tennessee law that made threats of mass violence at school a felony, has led to students being arrested based on rumors and for noncredible threats.
In one case, a Hamilton County deputy arrested an autistic 13-year-old in August for saying his backpack would blow up, though the teen later said he just wanted to protect the stuffed bunny inside.
In the same county almost two months later, a deputy tracked down and arrested an 11-year-old student at a family birthday party. The child later explained he had overheard one student asking if another was going to shoot up the school tomorrow, and that he answered “yes” for him. Last month, the public charter school agreed to pay the student’s family $100,000 to settle a federal lawsuit claiming school officials wrongly reported him to police. The school also agreed to implement training on how to handle these types of incidents, including reporting only “valid” threats to police.
Despite the outcry over increased arrests in Tennessee, two states followed its lead by passing laws that will crack down harder on hoax threats. New Mexico and Georgia have laws, more states are in the process.
Two States Follow Tennessee’s Lead and Pass School Threats Laws
Despite an outcry over increased arrests in Tennessee, two states — Georgia and New Mexico — followed its lead by passing laws that will crack down harder on hoax threats.ProPublica
Mathematicians move the needle on the Kakeya conjecture, a decades-old geometric problem
Mathematicians move the needle on the Kakeya conjecture, a decades-old geometric problem
Mathematicians from New York University and the University of British Columbia have resolved a decades-old geometric problem, the Kakeya conjecture in 3D, which studies the shape left behind by a needle moving in multiple directions.New York University (Phys.org)
Mathematicians move the needle on the Kakeya conjecture, a decades-old geometric problem
Mathematicians from New York University and the University of British Columbia have resolved a decades-old geometric problem, the Kakeya conjecture in 3D, which studies the shape left behind by a needle moving in multiple directions.New York University (Phys.org)
ChatGPT Mostly Source Wikipedia; Google AI Overviews Mostly Source Reddit
A study from Profound of OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews and Perplexity shows that while ChatGPT mostly sources its information from Wikipedia, Google AI Overviews and Perplexity mostly source their information from Reddit.
Portland Said It Was Investing in Homeless People’s Safety. Deaths Have Skyrocketed.
But although the city spent roughly $200,000 per homeless resident throughout that time (2019-2023-5 years at most), deaths of homeless people recorded in the county quadrupled, climbing from 113 in 2019 to more than 450 in 2023, according to the most recent data from the Multnomah County Health Department. The rise in deaths far outpaces the growth in the homeless population, which was recorded at 6,300 by a 2023 county census, a number most agree is an undercount. The county began including newly available state death records in its 2022 report, which added about 60 deaths to the yearly tolls.
Homeless residents of Multnomah County now die at a higher rate than in any major West Coast county with available homeless mortality data: more than twice the rate of those in Los Angeles County and the Washington state county containing Seattle and Tacoma. Almost all the homeless population in Multnomah County lives within Portland city limits.
Portland Homeless Deaths Quadrupled Despite Investment in Safety
The city responded to an increase in homeless deaths by intensifying encampment sweeps and adding emergency shelter at the expense of permanent housing. Experts say this has perpetuated the problem.ProPublica
ChatGPT Mostly Source Wikipedia; Google AI Overviews Mostly Source Reddit
A study from Profound of OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews and Perplexity shows that while ChatGPT mostly sources its information from Wikipedia, Google AI Overviews and Perplexity mostly source their information from Reddit.
like this
I used ChatGPT on something and got a response sourced from Reddit. I told it I'd be more likely to believe the answer if it told me it had simply made up the answer. It then provided better references.
I don't remember what it was but it was definitely something that would be answered by an expert on Reddit, but would also be answered by idiots on Reddit and I didn't want to take chances.
ChatGPT Mostly Source Wikipedia; Google AI Overviews Mostly Source Reddit
A study from Profound of OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews and Perplexity shows that while ChatGPT mostly sources its information from Wikipedia, Google AI Overviews and Perplexity mostly source their information from Reddit.
The size of the riot doesn’t matter what matters is that LA County police plus the city and the fire department had the situation well in hand Trump is using this is an excuse to use the military to take control.
Makes me sick

It would be smaller if the police and federal government stop shooting at press and nonviolent protestors and making them move around.
It only gets violent when the aggressors(cops) become violent.
BBC: China's electric cars are cheaper, but at what cost? 🤣
China's electric cars are cheaper, but is there a deeper cost?
The future for EVs will inevitably involve China. But where does that leave the UK and Europe markets – and what of the questions around national security?Theo Leggett (BBC News)
Rep. Moulton says many Marine junior officers are opposed to LA deployment
Rep. Moulton says many Marine junior officers are opposed to LA deployment | WBUR News
U.S. Rep. Seth Moulton joins WBUR's Morning Edition to share his thoughts on the growing military presence in Los Angeles amid protests over immigration arrests.Tiziana Dearing (WBUR)
like this
politics reshared this.
Then disobey the unlawful order.
Is this whole nation just adverse to taking any action? I'm constantly hearing people complain, then do absolutely fuck all.
When analog restoration makes the past feel too real
Original text below by @versiqcontent@moist.catsweat.com
Lately I have been reflecting on how powerful old photos can become when they are carefully brought back to life. Not because of any specific image, but because of the strange feeling they create. You scan an old photo, adjust a few things, and suddenly it feels like the person is right there, alive and present.It makes you pause. This is not just an old picture. This is memory coming back with full force.
I found a short article that expresses this feeling really well. It talks about how youth in vintage photos can feel unexpectedly modern and how that changes the way we look at the past.
Curious if anyone else here has felt something similar while working with old family pictures or film.
Man impersonating ICE agent tied woman up during business robbery in the Mayfair section of Philadelphia
Man impersonating ICE agent tied woman up during business robbery in Mayfair
A man impersonating a law enforcement officer tied up and robbed a woman at a business in Mayfair.6abc Digital Staff (6abc Philadelphia)
like this
politics reshared this.
US ambassador to Israel says US no longer pursuing goal of independent Palestinian state
US ambassador to Israel says US no longer pursuing goal of independent Palestinian state
Mike Huckabee suggested any future Palestinian state should be carved out of ‘a Muslim country’Joseph Gedeon (The Guardian)
Israel deports Greta Thunberg after seizing Madleen, the ship she was on | AP News (2025-06-11)
Israel deports Greta Thunberg after seizing Madleen, the ship she was on | AP News (2025-06-11)apnews.com/article/thunberg-de…
------
Also a video on Youtube --> youtube.com/live/Hvios9GF4CY>> Speaking upon arrival in Paris en route to her home country of Sweden, Thunberg called for the release of the other activists who were detained aboard the Madleen...
>> ...The activists were held separately and some had trouble accessing lawyers, she added.
>> Asked why she agreed to deportation, she said, “Why would I want to stay in an Israeli prison more than necessary?”
>> Thunberg called on supporters to ask their governments “to demand not only humanitarian aid being let into Gaza but most importantly an end to the occupation and an end to the systemic oppression and violence that Palestinians are facing on an everyday basis.”..
#Madleen #EndOccupation #StopGenocide @palestine@a.gup.pe @israel
hcommons.social
hcommons.social is a microblogging network supporting scholars and practitioners across the humanities and around the world.Hometown hosted on hcommons.social
like this
politics reshared this.
[Patch Notes] 0.2.1 Hotfix 2
0.2.1 Hotfix 2
- Fixed a CPU performance issue affecting a wide range of players.
This fix is client-side and requires restarting your client to receive the fix. It's not yet deployed on consoles but will be later today.
Early Access Patch Notes - 0.2.1 Hotfix 2 - Forum - Path of Exile
Path of Exile is a free online-only action RPG under development by Grinding Gear Games in New Zealand.Path of Exile
[Announcement] Path of Exile: Secrets of the Atlas Item Filter Information
Announcements - Path of Exile: Secrets of the Atlas Item Filter Information - Forum - Path of Exile
Path of Exile is a free online-only action RPG under development by Grinding Gear Games in New Zealand.Path of Exile
Quik
in reply to bimbimboy • • •like this
KaRunChiy likes this.
Cassa
in reply to Quik • • •ViatorOmnium
in reply to Cassa • • •cecilkorik
in reply to ViatorOmnium • • •ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ
in reply to ViatorOmnium • • •theunknownmuncher
in reply to Quik • • •like this
KaRunChiy, RandomStickman, onewithoutaname e DaGeek247 like this.
TheTechnician27
in reply to theunknownmuncher • • •Fucking thank you. Yes, experienced editor to add to this: that's called the lead, and that's exactly what it exists to do. Readers are not even close to starved for summaries:
What's outrageous here isn't wanting summaries; it's that summaries already exist in so many ways, written by the human writers who write the contents of the articles. Not only that, but as a free, editable encyclopedia, these summaries can be changed at any time if editors feel like they no longer do their job somehow.
This not only bypasses the hard work real, human editors put in for free in favor of some generic slop that's impossible to QA, but it also bypasses the spirit of Wikipedia that if you see something wrong, you should be able to fix it.
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.orglike this
DaGeek247 likes this.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to Quik • • •like this
onewithoutaname likes this.
Photuris
in reply to Quik • • •There are also external AI tools that do this just fine.
But imagine these tools generating summaries of summaries.
MysticKetchup
in reply to Quik • • •FaceDeer
in reply to bimbimboy • • •What insightful and meaningful discourse.
like this
KaRunChiy likes this.
Catoblepas
in reply to FaceDeer • • •If they’re high quality editors who consistently put out a lot of edits then yeah, it is meaningful and insightful. Wikipedia exists because of them and only them. If most feel like they do and stop doing all this maintenance for free, then Wikipedia becomes a graffiti wall/ad space and not an encyclopedia.
Thinking the immediate disgust of the people doing all the work for you for free is meaningless is the best way to nose dive.
Also, you literally had to scroll past a very long and insightful comment to get to that.
like this
KaRunChiy, onewithoutaname e DaGeek247 like this.
FaceDeer
in reply to Catoblepas • • •No I didn't. It's in the summary, appropriately enough.
supersquirrel
in reply to bimbimboy • • •roofuskit
in reply to bimbimboy • • •apfelwoiSchoppen
in reply to bimbimboy • • •slacktoid
in reply to bimbimboy • • •FarraigePlaisteaċ
in reply to bimbimboy • • •AI chatbots unable to accurately summarise news, BBC finds
Imran Rahman-Jones (BBC News)like this
DaGeek247 likes this.
baltakatei
in reply to bimbimboy • • •like this
DaGeek247 likes this.
LWD
in reply to bimbimboy • • •"Pause" and not "Stop" is concerning.
Is it just me, or was the addition of AI summaries basically predetermined? The AI panel probably would only be attended by a small portion of editors (introducing selection bias) and it's unclear how much of the panel was dedicated to simply promoting the concept.
I imagine the backlash comes from a much wider selection of editors.
like this
DaGeek247 likes this.
unexposedhazard
in reply to LWD • • •BombOmOm
in reply to bimbimboy • • •like this
DaGeek247 e missingno like this.
Aatube
in reply to BombOmOm • • •Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.orgLWD
in reply to Aatube • • •Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.orgAatube
in reply to LWD • • •ricecake
in reply to BombOmOm • • •The intent was to make more uniform summaries, since some of them can still be inscrutable.
Relying on a tool notorious for making significant errors isn't the right way to do it, but it's a real issue being examined.
This is a perfectly accurate summary, but it's not entirely clear and has room for improvement.
I'm guessing they were adding new summaries so that they could clearly label them and not remove the existing ones, not out of a desire to add even more summaries.
azertyfun
in reply to ricecake • • •The entire mistake right there. Look no further. They saw a solution (LLMs) and started hunting for a problem.
Had they done it the right way round there might have been some useful, though less flashy, outcome. I agree many article summaries are badly written. So why not experiment with an AI that flags those articles for review? Or even just organize a community drive to clean up article summaries?
The questions are rhetorical of course. Like every GenAI peddler they don't have an interest in the problem they purport to solve, they just want to play with or sell you this shiny toy that pretends really convincingly that it is clever.
ricecake
in reply to azertyfun • • •Fundamentally, I agree with you.
The page being referenced
Because the phrase "Wikipedians discussed ways that AI..." Is ambiguous I tracked down the page being referenced. It could mean they gathered with the intent to discuss that topic, or they discussed it as a result of considering the problem.
The page gives me the impression that it's not quite "we're gonna use AI, figure it out", but more that some people put together a presentation on how they felt AI could be used to address a broad problem, and then they workshopped more focused ways to use it towards that broad target.
It would have been better if they had started with an actual concrete problem, brainstormed solutions, and then gone with one that fit, but they were at least starting with a problem domain that they thought it was a applicable to.
Personally, the problems I've run into on Wikipedia are largely low traffic topics where the content is too much like someone copied a textbook into the page, or just awkward grammar and confusing sentences.
This article quickly makes it clear that someone didn't write it in an encyclopedia style from scratch.
The method of finding a root in mathematics, based on repeated division of a segment in half and the subsequent selection of a subinterval in which the root is thought to be located.
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)azertyfun
in reply to ricecake • • •Aceticon
in reply to azertyfun • • •Ricky Rigatoni
in reply to BombOmOm • • •GregorGizeh
in reply to BombOmOm • • •Even beyond that, the "complex" language they claim is confusing is the whole point of Wikipedia. Neutral, precise language that describes matters accurately for laymen. There are links to every unusual or complex related subject and even individual words in all the articles.
I find it disturbing that a major share of the userbase is supposedly unable to process the information provided in this format, and needs it dumbed down even further. Wikipedia is already the summarized and simplified version of many topics.
a4ng3l
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •Ho come on it’s not that simple. Add to that the language barrier. And in general precise language and accuracy are not making knowledge more available to laymen. Laymen don’t have to vocabulary to start with, that’s pretty much the definition of being a layman.
There is definitely value in dumbing down knowledge, that’s the point of education.
Now using AI or pushing guidelines for editors to do it that’s entirely different discussion…
OrganicMustard
in reply to a4ng3l • • •The vocabulary is part of the knowledge. The concept goes with the word, that's how human brains understand stuff mostly.
You can click on the terms you don't know to learn about them.
RvTV95XBeo
in reply to OrganicMustard • • •This is what makes Wikipedia special. Not the fact that it is a giant encyclopedia, but that you can quickly and logically work your way through a complex subject at your pace and level of understanding. Reading about elements but don't know what a proton is? Guess what, there's a link right fucking there!
kurwa
in reply to a4ng3l • • •thedarkfly
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •Wikimedia project main page
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)then_three_more
in reply to BombOmOm • • •I feel like if they feel that this is an issue generate the summary in the talk page and have the editors refine and approve it before publishing. Alternatively set an expectation that the article summaries are in plain English.
sugar_in_your_tea
in reply to then_three_more • • •Well yeah, that's the point of a summary. If I want something in long form, I'll read the article.
then_three_more
in reply to sugar_in_your_tea • • •net00
in reply to bimbimboy • • •These summaries are useless anyways because the AI hallucinates like crazy... Even the newest models constantly make up bullshit.
It can't be relied on for anything, and it's double work reading the words it shits out and then you still gotta double check it's not made up crap.
FeelThePower
in reply to bimbimboy • • •madjo
in reply to bimbimboy • • •captainastronaut
in reply to madjo • • •pinball_wizard
in reply to madjo • • •Ditto. I don't want to overreact, but it's not a good look.
jeeva
in reply to madjo • • •captainastronaut
in reply to bimbimboy • • •drspod
in reply to bimbimboy • • •Lumisal
in reply to drspod • • •Same person who saw most American adults have a 6th grade reading level or lower?
Honestly that's the reason I thought it was a good idea at least. Might actually give them a place to start learning from and improve.
andros_rex
in reply to Lumisal • • •Those Americans with a 6th grade reading level or less are precisely the people who shouldn’t be reading AI summaries. They’ll lack the critical thinking and reading skills to catch on to garbage.
Simple Wikipedia already exists and is great.
Lumisal
in reply to andros_rex • • •Problem is they can't read Wikipedia articles in the first place. A lot of it, in particular anything STEM, is higher level reading.
What you're advocating for is the same as dropping off a physics textbook at an elementary school.
andros_rex
in reply to Lumisal • • •Thats why I mentioned Simple Wikipedia.
This is far more readable that what an AI generated version of the article would make.
physical phenomena associated with the presence and flow of electric charge
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Lumisal
in reply to andros_rex • • •andros_rex
in reply to Lumisal • • •Yeah - tbh the name sucks. I hate recommending it to students, because it feels like I’m calling them dumb.
But yes 100%. Instead of doing dumb AI shit, they should be advertising what they already have.
MCasq_qsaCJ_234
in reply to andros_rex • • •Wikipedia Simple has fewer articles than regular Wikipedia.
And how do you plan to convince editors to add more articles to Wikipedia Simple?
andros_rex
in reply to MCasq_qsaCJ_234 • • •That number of articles is still pretty impressive. I’d rather have fewer, high quality articles, than millions of terrible quality AI articles.
The great thing about Wikipedia is that anyone can add articles! It also wouldn’t be too difficult to “translate” regular Wikipedia articles to simple ones. You could even use AI tools to help - there are text leveler tools that will help you recognize which words lower level readers would struggle with and can help you make those changes. But this cannot be an automated process.
I’ve done graduate level course work on modifying text for “EMLs” - “emerging multilingual learners.” (“ELL” is still okay, but lots of folks in the field prefer EML because it is prioritizing the students “assets.”) I’ve made several assignments for students with reading difficulties. When I did experiment a bit with AI tools to help me with this process, I had to do a lot of fine tuning to get an acceptable product.
Tbh, you just convinced me right now that I should start adding more articles myself.
explodicle
in reply to MCasq_qsaCJ_234 • • •BassTurd
in reply to Lumisal • • •If someone is going to Wikipedia specifically looking for information in a STEM field, then an AI summary isn't going to help them. Odds are they can also read, because they're looking up STEM topics.
Also, is Wikipedia not available around the world, or you just think only Americans can't read? Inflammatory just for the sake of being inflammatory I'm guessing. Shit troll job.
Lumisal
in reply to BassTurd • • •ɯᴉuoʇuɐ
in reply to Lumisal • • •drspod
in reply to Lumisal • • •limer
in reply to bimbimboy • • •Aaaaarrgg! This is horrible they stopped AI summaries, which I was hoping would help corrupt a leading institution protecting free thought and transfer of knowledge.
Sincerely, the Devil, Satan
bimbimboy
in reply to limer • • •UniversalBasicJustice
in reply to limer • • •Lucifer is literally the angel of free thought. Satanism promotes critical thinking and the right to question authority. Wikipedia is one of the few remaining repositories of free knowledge and polluting it with LLM summaries is exactly the inscrutable, uncritiqueable bullshit that led to the Abrahamic god casting Lucifer out.
I realize your reply is facetious, but there's a reason we're dealing with christofascists and not satanic fascists. Don't do my boy dirty like that.
limer
in reply to UniversalBasicJustice • • •UniversalBasicJustice
in reply to limer • • •aesthelete
in reply to bimbimboy • • •wizardbeard
in reply to bimbimboy • • •Didn't they just pass a site-wide decision on the use of LLMs in creating/editing otherwise "human made" text?
Why do they need to take the human element out? Why would anyone want them to?
God I hope this isn't the beginning of the end for Wikipedia. They live and die on the efforts of volunteer editors (like Reddit relied on volunteer mods and third party tool devs). The fastest way to tank themselves is by driving off their volunteers with shit like this.
And it's absurdly easier to lose the good will they have than to rebuild it.
ayyy
in reply to wizardbeard • • •Domi
in reply to bimbimboy • • •ɯᴉuoʇuɐ
in reply to Domi • • •jjjalljs
in reply to bimbimboy • • •I'm so tired of "AI". I'm tired of people who don't understand it expecting it to be magical and error free. I'm tired of grifters trying to sell it like snake oil. I'm tired of capitalist assholes drooling over the idea of firing all that pesky labor and replacing them with machines. (You can be twice as productive with AI! But you will neither get paid twice as much nor work half as many hours. I'll keep all the gains.). I'm tired of the industrial scale theft that apologists want to give a pass to while individuals who torrent can still get in trouble, and libraries are chronically under funded.
It's just all bad, and I'm so tired of feeling like so many people are just not getting it.
I hope wikipedia never adopts this stupid AI Summary project.
like this
dandi8 likes this.
laranis
in reply to jjjalljs • • •otp
in reply to bimbimboy • • •If I wanted an AI summary, I'd put the article into my favourite LLM and ask for one.
I'm sure LLMs can take links sometimes.
And if Wikipedia wanted to include it directly into the site...make it a button, not an insertion.
vane
in reply to bimbimboy • • •doctortofu
in reply to vane • • •like this
dandi8 likes this.
mostlikelyaperson
in reply to vane • • •danc4498
in reply to bimbimboy • • •On the one hand, it’s insulting to expect people to write entries for free only to have AI just summarize the text and have users never actually read those written words.
On the other hand, the future is people copying the url into chat gpt and asking for a summary.
The future is bleak either way.
like this
dandi8 likes this.
winkerjadams
in reply to danc4498 • • •danc4498
in reply to winkerjadams • • •sep
in reply to danc4498 • • •You are correct that it would not instantly become unusable. But when all editors with integrity have ceased to contribute in frustration, wikipedia would eventually become stale, or very unreliable.
Also there is nothing stopping a person from using an llm to summarize an article for them. And the added benefit to that is that the energy and reasources used for that would be only used on the people that wanted to, not on evey single page view. I would assume the enegy consumption on that, would be significant.
like this
dandi8 likes this.
danc4498
in reply to sep • • •lapping6596
in reply to bimbimboy • • •stabby_cicada
in reply to lapping6596 • • •The United States is transitioning into a post-literate society. Teaching kids to read was too hard, and had the ugly side effect of encouraging critical thinking, and that led to liberalism, or worse, Marxism.
So we're using technology to eliminate reading entirely. After all, if you can ask a LLM any question and get a simple answer read to you out loud in simple vocabulary, what more do you need? Are you going to read for pleasure? To fact check? To better yourself? Sounds like ivory tower liberal elitism to me.
nutsack
in reply to bimbimboy • • •vithigar
in reply to nutsack • • •filcuk
in reply to vithigar • • •altkey (he\him)
in reply to bimbimboy • • •Rooty
in reply to bimbimboy • • •like this
dandi8 likes this.
nutsack
in reply to bimbimboy • • •like this
dandi8 likes this.
explodicle
in reply to nutsack • • •UnderpantsWeevil
in reply to nutsack • • •Too late.
With thresholds calibrated to achieve a 1% false positive rate on pre-GPT-3.5 articles, detectors flag over 5% of newly created English Wikipedia articles as AI-generated, with lower percentages for German, French, and Italian articles. Flagged Wikipedia articles are typically of lower quality and are often self-promotional or partial towards a specific viewpoint on controversial topics.
The Rise of AI-Generated Content in Wikipedia
arxiv.orgkassiopaea
in reply to UnderpantsWeevil • • •UnderpantsWeevil
in reply to kassiopaea • • •It isn't clear whether this content is posted by humans or by AI fueled bot accounts. All they're sifting for is text with patterns common to AI text generation tools.
The big inhibiting factor was effort. ChatGPT produces long form text far faster than humans and in a form less easy to identify than prior Markov Chains.
The fear is that Wikipedia will be swamped with slop content. Humans won't be able to keep up with the work of cleaning it out.
LWD
in reply to UnderpantsWeevil • • •At least it's only an issue for new articles, which probably have the least editor involvement.
People creating self-promotion on Wikipedia has been a problem for a long time before ChatGPT.
Parafaragaramus
in reply to bimbimboy • • •like this
dandi8 likes this.
johnlukepeckard
in reply to bimbimboy • • •Sam_Bass
in reply to bimbimboy • • •explodicle
in reply to Sam_Bass • • •— Upton Sinclair
AnyOldName3
in reply to explodicle • • •UnderpantsWeevil
in reply to Sam_Bass • • •One of the biggest changes for a nonprofit like Wikipedia is to find cheap/free labor that administration trusts.
AI "solves" this problem by lowering your standard of quality and dramatically increasing your capacity for throughput.
It is a seductive trade. Especially for a techno-libertarian like Jimmy Wales.
snf
in reply to Sam_Bass • • •