
2025-07-03 08:14:40
Globality and Regions
Hector Gramaglia
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.01664 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2507.01664
Globality and Regions
Hector Gramaglia
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.01664 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2507.01664
Calamus 15 O drops of me!
It's a remarkably morbid poem for Whitman, literally about blood dropping from wounds, corrupting his poetry.
stain every song I sing, every word I say, bloody drops
But he turns this blood into a sort of virtue that infuses his poem, starting with an inversion. It's not "saturate yourself with the drops". Instead it's saturate them with yourself.
Saturate them with yourself, all ashamed and wet,
Glow upon all I have written or shall write, bleeding drops,
Let it all be seen in your light, blushing drops.
I can make a case for a queer reading of recognizing gay shame and overcoming it. To take the stigma of homosexuality and turn it into a virtue, "let it all be seen in your light".
But I think I may be out on a limb with that interpretation. Whitman's not typically a writer about shame. And I think "gay shame" doesn't apply well as a concept in the 1850s, that's a malady that comes with a backlash against modern gay identity.
This https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.14263 has been replaced.
initial toot: https://mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mat…
Propulsion and interaction of wave-propelled interfacial particles
Daniel M. Harris, Jack-William Barotta
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.00247 https://
I’ve generally disliked South Park — not because it is rude and raunchy, but because it made it seem like being a cynical asshole is somehow brave and countercultural. It made the case that it’s OK to be carelessly hurtful as long as you hurt •everyone•. It tried to make a virtue out of disaffection. Its compulsion never to be caught actually •caring• about anything or anyone robbed it of its capacity to have insights or a moral center. It flirted with satire, but always ended up just being trolling.
But who knows? It feels like trolling the fascists might be what we need right now. Maybe the show finally has its moment.
#WordWeavers May 29
Have you ever doubted you'd finish a draft? If so, what kept you going?
All the time.
I finish what I start, I'm stubborn like that. Stupidly stubborn, one might say even. It is not a virtue, I can tell you.
Persistence Paradox in Dynamic Science
Honglin Bao, Kai Li
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.22729 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.22729
Harvard's Fight Is a Defense of Democracy and Civic Virtue (Emily Chamlee-Wright/Liberal Currents)
https://www.liberalcurrents.com/harvards-fight-is-a-defense-of-democracy-and-civic-virtue/
http://www.memeorandum.com/250708/p132#a250708p132
Sonnet 079 - LXXIX
Whilst I alone did call upon thy aid,
My verse alone had all thy gentle grace;
But now my gracious numbers are decay'd,
And my sick Muse doth give an other place.
I grant, sweet love, thy lovely argument
Deserves the travail of a worthier pen;
Yet what of thee thy poet doth invent
He robs thee of, and pays it thee again.
He lends thee virtue, and he stole that word
From thy behaviour; beauty doth he give,
Silicon Valley was never woke. It just played woke on TV. https://tldr.nettime.org/@remixtures/114721179380101771
Interrelation among Solvable Potentials and Extensions of SWKB Quantization Condition
Yuta Nasuda
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.22381 https://arxiv.org/pdf/25…
Sarah Josepha Hale is called the godmother of Thanksgiving
because for 40 years she wrote and lobbied five presidents and congressmen to establish it as a national holiday.
Hale, who is probably best remembered as the author of “Mary Had a Little Lamb,”
also wrote the novel “Northwood; or Life North and South,”
which argued for the virtue of the North against the evil slave owners of the South.
One of the chapters in her book discussed the importance of Thanks…
Universal and Efficient Quantum State Verification via Schmidt Decomposition and Mutually Unbiased Bases
Yunting Li, Huangjun Zhu
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.19809
#WordWeavers May 29
Have you ever doubted you'd finish a draft? If so, what kept you going?
All the time.
I finish what I start, I'm stubborn like that. Stupidly stubborn, one might say even. It is not a virtue, I can tell you.
Zohran Mamdani Is Right: We Shouldn’t Have Billionaires https://jacobin.com/2025/07/billionaires-wealth-inequality-zohran-mamdani/
This is true in every country in the world. There is simply no justification for any individual to be «worth» a …
Replaced article(s) found for stat.ML. https://arxiv.org/list/stat.ML/new
[2/2]:
- Discrepancies are Virtue: Weak-to-Strong Generalization through Lens of Intrinsic Dimension
Yijun Dong, Yicheng Li, Yunai Li, Jason D. Lee, Qi Lei
Why AI can't possibly make you more productive; long
#AI and "productivity", some thoughts:
Edit: fixed some typos.
Productivity is a concept that isn't entirely meaningless outside the context of capitalism, but it's a concept that is heavily inflected in a capitalist context. In many uses today it effectively means "how much you can satisfy and/or exceed your boss' expectations." This is not really what it should mean: even in an anarchist utopia, people would care about things like how many shirts they can produce in a week, although in an "I'd like to voluntarily help more people" way rather than an "I need to meet this quota to earn my survival" way. But let's roll with this definition for a second, because it's almost certainly what your boss means when they say "productivity", and understanding that word in a different (even if truer) sense is therefore inherently dangerous.
Accepting "productivity" to mean "satisfying your boss' expectations," I will now claim: the use of generative AI cannot increase your productivity.
Before I dive in, it's imperative to note that the big generative models which most people think of as constituting "AI" today are evil. They are 1: pouring fuel on our burning planet, 2: psychologically strip-mining a class of data laborers who are exploited for their precarity, 3: enclosing, exploiting, and polluting the digital commons, and 4: stealing labor from broad classes of people many of whom are otherwise glad to give that labor away for free provided they get a simple acknowledgement in return. Any of these four "ethical issues" should be enough *alone* to cause everyone to simply not use the technology. These ethical issues are the reason that I do not use generative AI right now, except for in extremely extenuating circumstances. These issues are also convincing for a wide range of people I talk to, from experts to those with no computer science background. So before I launch into a critique of the effectiveness of generative AI, I want to emphasize that such a critique should be entirely unnecessary.
But back to my thesis: generative AI cannot increase your productivity, where "productivity" has been defined as "how much you can satisfy and/or exceed your boss' expectations."
Why? In fact, what the fuck? Every AI booster I've met has claimed the opposite. They've given me personal examples of time saved by using generative AI. Some of them even truly believe this. Sometimes I even believe they saved time without horribly compromising on quality (and often, your boss doesn't care about quality anyways if the lack of quality is hard to measure of doesn't seem likely to impact short-term sales/feedback/revenue). So if generative AI genuinely lets you write more emails in a shorter period of time, or close more tickets, or something else along these lines, how can I say it isn't increasing your ability to meet your boss' expectations?
The problem is simple: your boss' expectations are not a fixed target. Never have been. In virtue of being someone who oversees and pays wages to others under capitalism, your boss' game has always been: pay you less than the worth of your labor, so that they can accumulate profit and thus more capital to remain in charge instead of being forced into working for a wage themselves. Sure, there are layers of management caught in between who aren't fully in this mode, but they are irrelevant to this analysis. It matters not how much you please your manager if your CEO thinks your work is not worth the wages you are being paid. And using AI actively lowers the value of your work relative to your wages.
Why do I say that? It's actually true in several ways. The most obvious: using generative AI lowers the quality of your work, because the work it produces is shot through with errors, and when your job is reduced to proofreading slop, you are bound to tire a bit, relax your diligence, and let some mistakes through. More than you would have if you are actually doing and taking pride in the work. Examples are innumerable and frequent, from journalists to lawyers to programmers, and we laugh at them "haha how stupid to not check whether the books the AI reviewed for you actually existed!" but on a deeper level if we're honest we know we'd eventually make the same mistake ourselves (bonus game: spot the swipe-typing typos I missed in this post; I'm sure there will be some).
But using generative AI also lowers the value of your work in another much more frightening way: in this era of hype, it demonstrates to your boss that you could be replaced by AI. The more you use it, and no matter how much you can see that your human skills are really necessary to correct its mistakes, the more it appears to your boss that they should hire the AI instead of you. Or perhaps retain 10% of the people in roles like yours to manage the AI doing the other 90% of the work. Paradoxically, the *more* you get done in terms of raw output using generative AI, the more it looks to your boss as if there's an opportunity to get enough work done with even fewer expensive humans. Of course, the decision to fire you and lean more heavily into AI isn't really a good one for long-term profits and success, but the modern boss did not get where they are by considering long-term profits. By using AI, you are merely demonstrating your redundancy, and the more you get done with it, the more redundant you seem.
In fact, there's even a third dimension to this: by using generative AI, you're also providing its purveyors with invaluable training data that allows them to make it better at replacing you. It's generally quite shitty right now, but the more use it gets by competent & clever people, the better it can become at the tasks those specific people use it for. Using the currently-popular algorithm family, there are limits to this; I'm not saying it will eventually transcend the mediocrity it's entwined with. But it can absolutely go from underwhelmingly mediocre to almost-reasonably mediocre with the right training data, and data from prompting sessions is both rarer and more useful than the base datasets it's built on.
For all of these reasons, using generative AI in your job is a mistake that will likely lead to your future unemployment. To reiterate, you should already not be using it because it is evil and causes specific and inexcusable harms, but in case like so many you just don't care about those harms, I've just explained to you why for entirely selfish reasons you should not use it.
If you're in a position where your boss is forcing you to use it, my condolences. I suggest leaning into its failures instead of trying to get the most out of it, and as much as possible, showing your boss very clearly how it wastes your time and makes things slower. Also, point out the dangers of legal liability for its mistakes, and make sure your boss is aware of the degree to which any of your AI-eager coworkers are producing low-quality work that harms organizational goals.
Also, if you've read this far and aren't yet of an anarchist mindset, I encourage you to think about the implications of firing 75% of (at least the white-collar) workforce in order to make more profit while fueling the climate crisis and in most cases also propping up dictatorial figureheads in government. When *either* the AI bubble bursts *or* if the techbros get to live out the beginnings of their worker-replacement fantasies, there are going to be an unimaginable number of economically desperate people living in increasingly expensive times. I'm the kind of optimist who thinks that the resulting social crucible, though perhaps through terrible violence, will lead to deep social changes that effectively unseat from power the ultra-rich that continue to drag us all down this destructive path, and I think its worth some thinking now about what you might want the succeeding stable social configuration to look like so you can advocate towards that during points of malleability.
As others have said more eloquently, generative AI *should* be a technology that makes human lives on average easier, and it would be were it developed & controlled by humanists. The only reason that it's not, is that it's developed and controlled by terrible greedy people who use their unfairly hoarded wealth to immiserate the rest of us in order to maintain their dominance. In the long run, for our very survival, we need to depose them, and I look forward to what the term "generative AI" will mean after that finally happens.
And just to be 100% clear, #LosAngeles is nailing it. Massive peaceful protests are great. That's absolutely unequivocally a good thing. So are burning cop cars. Diversity of tactics is critical.
Escalating radically at a protest with kids and grandmas is a shit thing to do. Don't do that unless it's absolutely necessary. Having kids and grandmas out protesting is important. Having them peacefully block vehicles with their bodies or occupy ICE facilitates *is* a strong thing. That is real. That's not virtue signaling, it does something... And sometimes that isn't enough. Sometimes things *need* to escalate to save people.
Diversity is good. Don't break the diversity of tactics *either way*. #LA seems to be doing a pretty good job right now or holding that balance. I hope to see more of that in every city.
Multi-partonic interactions, iterated discontinuities and the virtuality expansion in deep inelastic scattering
Zeno Capatti, Lucien Huber, Michael Ruf
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.16489
" Trump directed the Attorney General to seek the death penalty in every case in which a “capital crime” is committed by an undocumented migrant. By tying the harshest punishment the state can impose to the identity of the accused, the order signals that some people—by virtue of who they are—deserve to be killed. "
How Trump’s Death Penalty Order Codifies Dangerous Speech
https://www.justsecurity.org/114155/trump-death-penalty-codifies-dangerous-speech/
Maximal optical chirality via mode coupling in bilayer metasurfaces
Brijesh Kumar, Ivan Toftul, Anshuman Kumar, Maxim Gorkunov, Yuri Kivshar
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.17428 htt…
Measuring AI Alignment with Human Flourishing
Elizabeth Hilliard, Akshaya Jagadeesh, Alex Cook, Steele Billings, Nicholas Skytland, Alicia Llewellyn, Jackson Paull, Nathan Paull, Nolan Kurylo, Keatra Nesbitt, Robert Gruenewald, Anthony Jantzi, Omar Chavez
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.07787…
Multiplicity of young isolated planetary mass objects in Taurus and Upper Scorpius
H. Bouy, G. Duch\^ene, G. Strampelli, J. Aguilar, J. Olivares, D. Barrado, S. N. Raymond, N. Hu\'elamo, M. Tamura, E. Bertin, W. Brandner, J. -C. Cuillandre, P. A. B. Galli, N. Miret-Roig
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.14380
Extremism in defence of privilege is no virtue.
On the solvability of some systems of quadratic integral equations in dimensions two and three
Vitali Vougalter
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.15069 https://…
Electricity Market Predictability: Virtues of Machine Learning and Links to the Macroeconomy
Jinbo Cai, Wenze Li, Wenjie Wang
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.07477
Hard to find a single summarizing quote from the post, but it keeps coming back to two closely related ideas:
(1) the tendency of humans to blame themselves for poor tool performance (“oh I should have prompted in •that• way instead, my bad”), and
(2) what we educators call the “hidden curriculum:” people are unaware of learning they have done / habitual effort they are expending, and thus they see their own learning / ongoing effort as zero-cost, obvious, nonexistent, innate personal virtue, etc.
The existence of (2) sets people up for (1); recognizing (2) helps cure (1).
4/
Relativistic implications of entropy and purity
Joseph Balsells, Martin Bojowald
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.14705 https://arxiv.org/p…
Adaptive event-triggered robust tracking control of soft robots
Renjie Ma, Ziyao Qu, Zhijian Hu, Dong Zhao, Marios M. Polycarpou
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.09523
This https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.12098 has been replaced.
initial toot: https://mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_…
Distribution-Level AirComp for Wireless Federated Learning under Data Scarcity and Heterogeneity
Jun-Pyo Hong, Hyowoon Seo, Kisong Lee
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06090
The pursuit of happiness
Debora Princepe, Onofrio Mazzarisi, Erol Akcay, Simon A. Levin, Matteo Marsili
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.10537 https://
Sonnet 066 - LXVI
Tired with all these, for restful death I cry,
As to behold desert a beggar born,
And needy nothing trimm'd in jollity,
And purest faith unhappily forsworn,
And gilded honour shamefully misplac'd,
And maiden virtue rudely strumpeted,
And right perfection wrongfully disgrac'd,
And strength by limping sway disabled
And art made tongue-tied by authority,
And folly, doctor-like, controlling skill,
And…