I'll just comment on my impressions of their conclusions in a thread here. Worth sharing how I see it unfolding internally. (I signed up for their email spam to read this so yes, I am a hero.)
Sue Smith
"The AI engineering impact data shows that output is up. It also shows that the work required to ensure that output is safe, correct, and maintainable has not decreased. It has increased substantially." Aye, if only any of us had been saying this from day one 🤡 faros.ai/blog/ai-acceleration-whiplash…
Jun 12, 2026 at 7:23 PM
Andreas De Block on Twitter / X
It took Nature three years to publish this rebuttal, which clearly demonstrates the fundamental flaws in the original paper. In the meantime, the paper's conclusions influenced scientific debate and policy decisions. Such delays in correcting flawed research do real damage. https://t.co/QI3Ei3PE70— Andreas De Block (@DeblockBlock) August 13, 2026
The Conversation Canada (@ca.theconversation.com)
Written by academic experts, edited by journalists, backed by evidence ✉️ Newsletter: http://bit.ly/2W8X3Ev 🎧 Podcast: http://bit.ly/39v1EE0 ➕ Donate: http://bit.ly/3GV1uam
Reality Check
Like this newsletter? Why not listen to the podcast version on Better Offline? Part 1 is out now (here're other links), and Part 2 comes out Friday May 2nd! I'm sick and god-damn tired of this! I have written tens of thousands of words about this and still, to this
Elena Rossini 🌈 (@_elena@mastodon.social)
🚨 New post alert 📝 A deep dive into #WSocial with some fascinating findings: candid statements about their motives, a Greta Thunberg connection, potential AI plans (!!!) Why write about it again? I still had so many questions after publishing my first article. I spent 3 weeks watching every interview I could find and connecting the dots. I hope you'll enjoy this piece: 🔗 : https://blog.elenarossini.com/the-untold-story-about-w-social-unconventional-beginnings-strategic-pitches-conflicting-signals/ #blog #longread #privacy #DataMining #Europe
The Left Has An AI Problem
Deceptive Alignment is
Thanks to Wil Perkins, Grant Fleming, Thomas Larsen, Declan Nishiyama, and Frank McBride for feedback on this post. Thanks also to Paul Christiano, D…
The Future of Everything is Lies, I Guess
This is a long article, so I've broken it up into a series of posts, listed below. You can also read the full work as a PDF or EPUB.
Why Are We Still Doing This?
Hi! If you like this piece and want to support my work, please subscribe to my premium newsletter. It’s $70 a year, or $7 a month, and in return you get a weekly newsletter that’s usually anywhere from 5000 to 185,000 words, including vast, extremely detailed analyses
The Conversation: In-depth analysis, research, news and ideas from leading academics and researchers.
Curated by professional editors, The Conversation offers informed commentary and debate on the issues affecting our world. Plus a Plain English guide to the latest developments and discoveries from the university and research sector.
OK, I wrote up a whole blog post with some more detailed thoughts on this. Curious if anything here resonates with other folks. Thanks to @iame.li, @dholms.at, and @bnewbold.net for helpful pointers and discussions! pckt.blog/b/bits-of-entropy/all-data-sh…
All data should be permissioned data - Bits of Entropy
pckt.blog
Richard Barnes
@dholms.at - What is the right venue for discussion on this Permissioned Data proposal you wrote up. atp@ietf.org or something else? I think it is wrong in some pretty fundamental ways. Or at least the motivations are poorly articulated.
I'll just comment on my impressions of their conclusions in a thread here. Worth sharing how I see it unfolding internally. (I signed up for their email spam to read this so yes, I am a hero.)
Sue Smith
"The AI engineering impact data shows that output is up. It also shows that the work required to ensure that output is safe, correct, and maintainable has not decreased. It has increased substantially." Aye, if only any of us had been saying this from day one 🤡 faros.ai/blog/ai-acceleration-whiplash…
Good news, everyone! I have a short piece coming out in The Conversation on Monday that explains the main issues with this study. It's impossible for me to have the same media reach as the original press release. So I'd be extremely grateful if people could help me share it as widely as possible 🙏
G. Willow Wilson
Good news, everyone cnn.com/2026/05/14/health/arts-ageing…
at this point no one cares, but i was invited to talk about the high-rep retraction saga, and once again, i find myself perplexed at the exclusion of confirmatory results in any calculation in a study making a key claim about the inclusion of confirmatory studies making results highly replicable.
We just finished a restructuring. The website is now the source of truth for governance, the schemas moved to Tangled, NSID resolution got a dedicated identity, and the process is lighter. The story is on the new blog: blog.lexicon.community/a/3mrlquupo2a23-reintroducing…
This is crazy! The data from the study show patterns that make it nearly impossible for it to be legit. But we can learn a lot from the tone of the comments. "We have concerns about [x], please clarify." Out in the wild, this would be THESE IDIOTS FAKED THEIR STUDY!!
Health Nerd
This is one of the most remarkable academic debacles I've ever seen. A large RCT got published in BMJ. There are currently 44 Pubpeer comments, mostly about the data, including...well. Read for yourself. pubpeer.com/publications/C08779C45DB6E407…
