At @SD_LDF I talked about how we can create momentum in collaborative projects - and if you liked the taste of it then my TEDx is a good compliment on the dynamics of groups and how we can have better conversations #sdff2019 #sdff youtu.be/rf3imYVetWo?t=21

This agent enshrined a preference for bullet point lists in its personality and I think I did the same in my twenties

Men who would rather endlessly optimize agentic workflows through heavy use of industrial compute than go to therapy

Every time I read a sales email that's personalized I delete it block the person immediately. I know those people are going to automate 5 follow-ups.

My most nourishing books of 2025 #FallingUpwards by @RichardRohrOFM - on 2nd half of life #StayingWithTheTrouble by #DonnaHaraway - on living well in challenged times #HeraldOfARestlessWorld by @EtheHerring - on #HenriBergson who says time isn't space linkedin.com/pulse/wisdom-fr…

It is your solemn duty to learn how to enjoy yourselves.

Much of the comfort of getting older is from realizing the specific ways you’re different from others and feeling neither shame nor pride over them, and instead shrugging in a self-accepting humorous way to make decisions that actually suit the creature you are

People imagined the Internet as a utopia because it'd put all the world's information in our pocket, but instead of enjoying the great books and watching the great movies, we've become obsessed with what's happening now. The majority of what people consume online was created in the past 24 hours. It's good for business, but bad for the soul. News and gossip and your friends' Instagram stories seem important in the moment, but they're little tricksters because of how they pull our attention away from true quality. Sure, some of it is worthy. But the vast majority of it is a distraction. And this, I insist, is a root cause of the anxiety and dizziness that plagues modern life. We're stuck in a Never-Ending Now, and no matter how hard you try to resist, the Internet pulls you right back into it.

Only in suffering do we begin to live a spiritual life.

Major preprint just out! We compare how humans and LLMs form judgments across seven epistemological stages. We highlight seven fault lines, points at which humans and LLMs fundamentally diverge: The Grounding fault: Humans anchor judgment in perceptual, embodied, and social experience, whereas LLMs begin from text alone, reconstructing meaning indirectly from symbols. The Parsing fault: Humans parse situations through integrated perceptual and conceptual processes; LLMs perform mechanical tokenization that yields a structurally convenient but semantically thin representation. The Experience fault: Humans rely on episodic memory, intuitive physics and psychology, and learned concepts; LLMs rely solely on statistical associations encoded in embeddings. The Motivation fault: Human judgment is guided by emotions, goals, values, and evolutionarily shaped motivations; LLMs have no intrinsic preferences, aims, or affective significance. The Causality fault: Humans reason using causal models, counterfactuals, and principled evaluation; LLMs integrate textual context without constructing causal explanations, depending instead on surface correlations. The Metacognitive fault: Humans monitor uncertainty, detect errors, and can suspend judgment; LLMs lack metacognition and must always produce an output, making hallucinations structurally unavoidable. The Value fault: Human judgments reflect identity, morality, and real-world stakes; LLM "judgments" are probabilistic next-token predictions without intrinsic valuation or accountability. Despite these fault lines, humans systematically over-believe LLM outputs, because fluent and confident language produce a credibility bias. We argue that this creates a structural condition, Epistemia: linguistic plausibility substitutes for epistemic evaluation, producing the feeling of knowing without actually knowing. To address Epistemia, we propose three complementary strategies: epistemic evaluation, epistemic governance, and epistemic literacy. Full paper in the first reply. Joint with @Walter4C & @matjazperc

You don’t say