Will Ashley achieve her skateboard dreams?? Are our heuristics around learning making it impossible for us to learn? Can you improve your adherence to your goals?? Latest Change, Technically is another LEARNING STRATEGIES episode!
https://www.changetechnically.fyi/2396236/episodes/19131922-you-have-bad-mental-models-of-learning
Under-reported details of the xAI/Anthropic Colossus data center deal: Anthropic get Colossus 1 but xAI keep using the larger Colossus 2, Colossus 1 has a REALLY bad environmental record, and xAI just shut down a bunch of older models on 2 weeks' notice https://simonwillison.net/2026/May/7/xai-anthropic/
As a non-binary person who used to have internalised enbyphobia, I can't help but notice the accidentally artistic poignancy of a de-non-binary person arguing relentlessly against structurelessness— or rather, arguing that structurelessness does not exist.
I analyzed my coding sessions and on the text interactions some words stand out. And well, they also show up on Google Trends as spiking. Oh and so much slop in my Twitter mentions and on GitHub. Thus here are some updated thoughts on all of this. https://lucumr.pocoo.org/2026/5/4/content-for-contents-sake/
If you haven't read Benjamin Breen's thoughts on Talkie, you should! I agree that this is an exciting moment, exactly because we don't quite know yet what these things (historical language models) can or can't legitimately do.
There are going to be temptations and false steps. Breen mentions +
Are "Vintage LLMs" the start o...
@jonny @albertcardona but that’s kind of my point: I don’t think we *have* (or have ever had) ‘definitions of learning’ by which NNs ‘don’t learn’, precisely because “learn” is a (crude) description of a behaviour, not something defined in mechanistic terms…
I’ve never understood NNs as attempting to provide a ‘definition of learning’ itself, though they provide a mechanism, which might or might not have relevant similarities to human learning depending on level of description or detail one is interested in….
“adjusting weights via backprop” is a mechanism, not a system level behaviour and my original reply was that the statment “LLMs don’t “think” they just compute probability distributions” confuses behaviours and behaviour generating mechanisms…
to my mind, that’s not a ‘semantic debate’ or argument about meaning but about a deeper conceptual confusion that seems common in those kinds of articles…
whether pointing *that* out is interesting or enlightening is, of course, a different matter ;-)
uspol
Sergey Brin is a case study in why billionaires should not exist.
It didn't quite manage to draw me a pelican riding a bicycle, but I still appreciated its era-appropriate response
Tomorrow on Oxide and Friends, Polish software engineer Gregorein joins @ahl.bsky.social and me at a Europe-friendly(ish?) time: noon Pacific (9p in Europe) to discuss his work taking apart Garry Tan's code -- and my blog entry reflecting on the peril of laziness lost.
https://bcantrill.dtrace.org/2026/04/12/the-peril-of-laziness-lost/
Join us live, or catch the recording in syndication (as always):
RE: https://mastodon.social/@glyph/116410420686311601
Actually maybe I will say something about this. I have worried it over in my mind a LOT. I will share some details that feel very personal but important: in my family there is schizophrenia and other severe mental problems. I am privileged to not have these, but I have always monitored for it and this shaped my life and why I went into psychology in the first place
I do think technology can trigger latent mental health issues; I think ways of working can too (e.g., stress & fatigue can as well)
code / data wrangler in Switzerland.
Recovering reply guy. Posts random photos once in a while.