文脈なしセファ

Malaysian Mime Artist / Traditional Performing Arts Researcher || @projekrabak @kedutaanipoh @hiroshima_univ

[Sami Zayn @SamiZayn]

We did it.

[Scholarship for PhD @ScholarshipfPhd]

Ten Simple Rules for Making Good Oral Presentations

[Suppressed News. @SuppressedNws1]

WOW.

AlJazeera just dropped a ONE HOUR documentary about ISRAEL’s CRIMES against the PALESTINIANS.

This is very HARD TO WATCH.

[Valerio Capraro @ValerioCapraro]

Students without access to LLMs are 2 to 8 times more creative than students with access.

That is the finding of a new paper comparing 2,200 college admissions essays written by humans before ChatGPT with essays generated by GPT-4.

The key point is not individual creativity. GPT-4 can write well, sometimes better than individual students. The problem is collective creativity.

Each new human essay added new semantic territory. New ideas. New angles. New experiences. New combinations.

Each new GPT-4 essay added much less.

The authors call this the diversity growth rate: how much novelty each additional text contributes to the collective pool of ideas.

Humans kept expanding the pool. GPT-4 made the pool converge.

Even when the authors pushed GPT-4 to be more creative, changed parameters, or used chain-of-thought prompting, the homogenizing effect remained.

This is the real danger of AI in education.
Not that students will write worse.
That everyone will write the same.

*
Full paper in the first reply

[Emmanuel Tsekleves @PhDtoProf]

The first systematic review I submitted was rejected three times before it got published.

Each time, reviewers asked the same thing. Where is your flowchart?

The PRISMA flowchart is not a reporting formality. It is the document reviewers will read first. It decides whether they trust the rest of your review.

[David Perell Clips @PerellClips]

Academics write for each other, not for people.

Steven Pinker has spent over four decades doing the opposite, and thinks current academic writing is "enormous wasted effort."

"There's an awful lot of brilliant work, really smart people in academia. Why are they doing it? Just to entertain each other? Taxpayers pay for it. It should be accessible. Why should I have to read a paragraph five or six times?

It gets under my skin when academics devote so much brainpower into the scholarship and then just blow off the essential task of letting the world know what you've done."

[Juanlu_CabanillasGar @JuanluCaba_Unex]

Exploring the Ethical Landscape of AI in Academic Writing
https://t.co/pTgqkXaFNM

[Valerio Capraro @ValerioCapraro]

The Pope is making exactly our point. LLMs “may imitate or even simulate, but they do not understand.”

This is the core epistemic fault line.

Most AI evaluation is still based on one assumption: if a system statistically approximates human behaviour, then it is close to human intelligence.

But approximation is not intelligence.
Simulation is not understanding.

LLMs can produce the right answer without knowing why it is right. They can simulate empathy without feeling. They can imitate judgment without responsibility. They can generate coherent explanations without having a world to which those explanations are accountable.

Stop confusing behavioural similarity with cognitive equivalence.

Human understanding is embodied, affective, relational, motivational, and normative. It is not just the production of plausible text.

*
Full paper in the first reply

[Faheem Ullah @Faheem_uh]

PhD Students - Here is an example of a good discussion section.

A good discussion section should answer 6 questions.

1. What is different in your findings compared to previous research?

2. What is similar in your findings compared to previous research?

3. How different sections of your results section correlate?

4. What are the implications of your findings for practitioners?

5. What are the implications of your findings for researchers?

6. What are the limitations or threats to the validity of your findings?

Anything you'd like to add?

[尾道市立美術館 @bijutsu1]

時をかける猫ねこ057"Cats Who Leapt Through Time" (20170528)

『Ken🐈‍⬛🐈Go』ほぼ 9年前🎨朝、美術館前のモニュメントに集合してましたニャ。#尾道市立美館 #尾道 #猫

[Valerio Capraro @ValerioCapraro]

I think it's time to define a new bias: LLMorphism is the belief that humans work like large language models.

Since I started writing about the differences between human and artificial intelligence, I have received hundreds of messages from people who truly believe that humans are just LLMs.

That human language is just next-token prediction.

That creativity is just recombination of linguistic input.

That humans always hallucinate and never really aim at truth.

These people are not anthropomorphizing LLMs. They're doing the opposite: they're LLMorphizing humans.

Over the past months, I have been thinking about this phenomenon. I argue that it emerges from two mutually reinforcing psychological mechanisms:

Analogical transfer, whereby features of LLMs are projected onto humans due to output alignment;

Metaphorical availability, whereby the vocabulary of LLMs becomes a culturally salient way of describing human thought.

LLMorphism is a bias because it is based on an invalid inference: that similarity in linguistic outputs implies similarity in underlying processes.

In this new paper, I define LLMorphism, describe its psychological basis, distinguish it from related constructs, and discuss its possible social consequences.

My worry is that LLMorphism may badly impact various sectors of society by taking mind, agency, and understanding away from humans.

The public debate may be missing half of the problem. The issue is not only whether we are attributing too much mind to machines.
It is also whether we are beginning to attribute too little mind to humans.

Article in the first reply.

[Helter Skelter @Roshinee_M]

I now need your help to encourage your MP to officially support my parliamentary petition to discipline truant Malaysian Parliamentarians 🤝

Get my MP email template via this link: https://t.co/q9PrPGKHFZ

[Curious Minds @CuriousMindsHub]

Critical thinking is older than we think.

Long before modern education, philosophers challenged assumptions, questioned beliefs, and searched for truth through reflection.

Progress begins when people start questioning.

[Yasir Ai @AiwithYasir]

It’s a hefty 206-page research paper, and the findings are concerning.

"LLM users consistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels"

This study finds LLM dependence weakens the writer’s own neural and linguistic fingerprints. 🤔🤔

Relying only on EEG, text mining, and a cross-over session, the authors show that keeping some AI-free practice time protects memory circuits and encourages richer language even when a tool is later reintroduced.
Let me explain: 🧵

[尾道市立美術館 @bijutsu1]

時をかける猫ねこ036"Cats Who Leapt Through Time" (20170506)

『Ken🐈‍⬛🐈Go』ほぼ 9年前🎨ケンちゃんとゴッちゃんが交わる場所がエントランスでしたニャ。#尾道市立美館 #尾道 #猫

[Mesut Özil @M10]

Malaysia Trip

[Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005]

Keep using AI for everything.

I'm serious. Don't change a thing.

Just know what researchers found when they studied 666 people across multiple age groups and measured the relationship between AI tool usage and critical thinking ability.

Significant negative correlation.

The more frequently someone relied on AI tools, the weaker their independent reasoning became. Younger users showed the highest AI dependence and the lowest critical thinking scores.

The paper: "AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking"
MDPI Societies, January 2025.

The irony is precise.

The people using AI most aggressively to appear smarter are the ones quietly losing the ability to think without it.

There's a version of AI use that makes you sharper. You use it to challenge your thinking, pressure-test your reasoning, find gaps in your argument.

And there's the version most people use. Outsource the thinking entirely. Accept the output. Move on.

One builds you.

The other slowly replaces you.

[Stew Peters @realstewpeters]

PETE HEGSETH: “We took out Iran’s nuclear capabilities last year. This war wasn’t started because they were close to getting nuclear weapons, it started because they still had nuclear ambitions.”

Hegseth accidentally tells congress that Iran posed no imminent threat to America.

[BFM News @NewsBFM]

Selangor is encouraging new data centres to use recycled or treated raw water for cooling systems.

Exco Ng Sze Han said data centres do not necessarily require potable water, and as such, alternative sources should be used to protect supply for consumers.

🧵1

[Anwar Ibrahim @anwaribrahim]

Saya mengutuk tindakan ganas rejim Zionis Israel terhadap misi kemanusiaan Global Sumud Flotilla di perairan antarabangsa, satu pelanggaran nyata undang-undang maritim dan menyerupai tindakan lanun yang mencemari prinsip kemanusiaan sejagat.

Malaysia mendesak agar semua pihak bertindak dengan segera dan memastikan tiada sebarang tindakan keras dikenakan terhadap semua para aktivis, termasuk 10 rakyat Malaysia yang kini ditahan dan terputus hubungan. Keselamatan mereka mesti dijamin tanpa kompromi.

Kerajaan MADANI sedang berhubung dan bekerjasama rapat dengan negara-negara sahabat bagi memastikan mereka dibebaskan dengan segera.

Dalam situasi getir ini, ihsan dan kemanusiaan harus mengatasi segala perbezaan dan Malaysia akan terus berdiri teguh mempertahankan prinsip tersebut.

Kepada Allah SWT kita berserah, disulam dengan usaha menyeluruh yang sedang digerakkan, semoga kesemua mereka berada dalam keadaan selamat. Doa seluruh rakyat Malaysia mengiringi Global Sumud Flotilla.

Hasbunallahu wa ni‘mal wakil.