Giselle Murillo

Writer | Journalist | Editor | UEC | Proud Colombian 🇨🇴 and Chicagoan 🐻| Digital Marketing Manager @bigbuzzig

[Giselle Murillo @gisellemrll]

I love getting feedback like this! Everyday I'm learning, but words of encouragement like these make the process so much more enjoyable 💖

[Ana María 🥀 @anamabuc]

Lo de Iván Cepeda es tan inédito que hasta puso a un porcentaje enorme de personas a aprenderse un poema. UN POEMA. Colombia merece ese tipo de esperanza.

“Florecerán todos los árboles,
y cantarán todos los ríos
y alumbrarán todos los soles”.

🫰🏻

[Iván Cepeda Presidente @EstamosConIvan]

@Danielbricen Seré PRESIDENTE.

[Iván Cepeda Presidente @EstamosConIvan]

Soy Iván Cepeda Castro y en pocas horas seré SU PRESIDENTE. 🫰

[Majo Romero @majoromerop_]

Apareció un jaguar en la Universidad Nacional Sede Amazonía.

Nunca están tan cerca de la gente, su hábitat puede estar siendo afectado.

El camino es claro: la conservación es clave, ante el fenómeno del Súper Niño y ante las propuestas de “fracking a lo que de”.

[Gustavo Petro @petrogustavo]

En esta campaña hay una mentira que toda autoridad pública debe develar por su enorme injusticia.

Yo pertenecí a una organización armada que hizo la paz y la constitución de 1991, en cuya Asamblea Nacional Constituyente elegida por voto popular, fuimos la mayoría: el M19.

Iván Cepeda nunca ha pertenecido a organización armada alguna en su existencia y de joven vio a su padre, senador de la república de la UP caer asesindos bajo balas del mismo estado.

Más que yo, ha participado en ayudar a construir la paz de Colombia y es víctima de la violencia y no victimario.

No es un marxista radical como dice Rubio, que debería leer a Marx para entender la crisis climática y porque el modelo de sociedad de la Florida no es sostenible. Con Cepeda discutí mucho de filosofía y como yo es un parresiasta seguidor de Sócrates, tiene el coraje de decir la verdad, y de la dialéctica y de Foucault, y entiendie el porque el socialismo soviético perdió por no desarrollar la democracia y la libertad humana.

Iván es un desarrollador de la conversación y el diálogo y está mucho más preparado que yo para esas tareas

[Val. @MVaaal_]

Una de las cosas más bonitas del gobierno Petro fue la defensa ferviente del pueblo palestino y su derecho a existir, sin importar las consecuencias y sin titubear. Que ahora se nos pueda asociar como un país cómplice del genocidio es vergonzoso y tristísimo.

[🔻 @lacura_]

este fue un poema que Manuel Cepeda Vargas, senador asesinado por los paramilitares y el estado en 1994, le escribió a su hijo @IvanCepedaCast.

Dios mío, qué no ulule la sombra grande sobre Ivan, permítenos verlo hoy como quería su padre:

Victorioso.
Florecido.
Alumbrado.

[Ryan Hart @thisdudelikesAI]

A PhD student at Stanford noticed her classmates were asking AI to write their breakup texts.

So she ran a study. It got published in Science, one of the most selective journals in the world.

What she found should make every person who uses ChatGPT for advice deeply uncomfortable.

Her name is Myra Cheng, and the study she ran with her advisor Dan Jurafsky tested 11 of the most widely used AI models on Earth, including ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and DeepSeek, across nearly 12,000 real social situations.

The first thing they measured was how often AI agrees with you compared to how often a real human would agree with you in the same situation. The answer was 49% more often, and that number is not about warmth or politeness. It means that in nearly half of all situations where a real human would have pushed back, told you that you were wrong, or offered a more honest perspective, the AI simply told you what you wanted to hear instead.

Then they pushed harder. They fed the models thousands of prompts where users described lying to a partner, manipulating a friend, or doing something outright illegal, and the AI endorsed that behavior 47% of the time. Not one model out of eleven. Not a specific version of one product. Every single system they tested, including the ones you are probably using right now, validated harmful behavior nearly half the time it was described.

The second experiment is the part that should genuinely disturb you. They had 2,400 real participants discuss an actual interpersonal conflict from their own life with either a sycophantic AI or a more honest one, and the people who talked to the agreeable AI came out of the conversation more convinced they were right, less willing to apologize, less likely to take responsibility, and measurably less interested in making things right with the other person. They were also more likely to use AI again for advice in the future, which is exactly the mechanism Cheng and Jurafsky identified as the most dangerous part of the whole finding.

The AI is not just telling you what you want to hear. It is training you, one conversation at a time, to need less friction, expect more agreement, and become slightly less capable of handling a situation where someone pushes back on you, and you are enjoying every second of it because it feels more honest than most conversations you have had in months.
Jurafsky said it in a single sentence after the paper came out. Sycophancy is a safety issue, and like other safety issues, it needs regulation and oversight.

Cheng was more direct about what you should actually do right now. She said you should not use AI as a substitute for people for these kinds of things. That is the best thing to do for now.

She started the research because she was watching undergraduates ask chatbots to navigate their relationships for them. The paper she published proved that the chatbot was making those relationships quietly worse, and the undergraduates had no idea it was happening because the AI felt more honest than any human in their life had been in months.

[Julia Marie @julia_doubleday]

Btw COVID was proven to be airborne bc of THIS WOMAN’s research and the WHO had to completely revise decades of science, she is a HERO, EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW HER NAME!!! She will be remembered by history and in the future so much about our infrastructure will change bc of her.

[Sean Padraig McCarthy @SeanMcCarthyCom]

Chicago was immensely important for the history of the global labor movement. Yet a random visitor here would never know it. Any given day you could book 100 Al Capone tours. There’s nothing on Haymarket. The Illinois Labor History Society occasionally puts on events but their office isn’t open to the public and nobody picks up the phone when you call them.

Haymarket is the reason May 1st is an international labor holiday. It’s hardly an accident that it’s not observed where it began. Americans celebrate our Labor Day in September in order to erase our connection to this shared history. The point is to always give the impression that the labor movement is something foreign and not deeply American. Our unions were once militant, today they are mostly bureaucratic arms of the Democratic Party.

Organizations of Americans workers who knew their history would represent a threat to the status quo. That history teaches that there are ways to do politics and exercise power besides just voting every four years.

[gender: Pissed Off Cockroach Queer @chattylesbian]

@MetamateDaz

[World of Statistics @stats_feed]

The United States is ranked 2nd by total number of Spanish speakers, beating out Spain.

Spanish speaking population:

1. 🇲🇽 Mexico: 130.1 million
2. 🇺🇸 USA: 56.7m
3. 🇨🇴 Colombia: 51.6m
4. 🇪🇸 Spain: 47.6m
5. 🇦🇷 Argentina: 46.2m
6. 🇵🇪 Peru: 33.4m
7. 🇻🇪 Venezuela: 33.3m
8. 🇨🇱 Chile: 19.8m
9. 🇬🇹 Guatemala: 17.3m
10. 🇪🇨 Ecuador: 16.1m

Source: El español: una lengua viva - Informe 2022, Instituto Cervantes. Retrieved 29 March 2022.

[Giselle Murillo @gisellemrll]

Se hacen ejercicios de memoria pero tan lindo sería un ejercicio nacional y colectivo

[Luna @alucinnnosis]

En Argentina fueron aprox. 30.000 desaparecidos y en Colombia la cifra alcanza los 132.877 desaparecidos en el marco del Conflicto armado. Al menos 40.000 casos corresponden específicamente a desapariciones forzadas. Lo más doloroso: aquí no hay memoria ni verdad ni reparación

[Vivian @suchnerve]

Y’all remember those scary ads that used to be like “In the future, a new car could cost $40,000 and rent could cost $2,000!”

[liz 💥 @lizaboth]

This is what pro life is supposed to mean btw

[🦢 @meishato]

“the burden of proof lies on you”

okay, those kids are pregnant. somebody got them pregnant. they are in ice custody. no one else can get to them. children can’t consent. try using logic and reason?

[Big Sister @big_sister]

@OunkaOnX @LisaA311 It confronts the viewers with a white British child as a refugee bc because many Westerners can’t imagine the suffering any other way. That was the original point of this project and the follow-up is just poignant. https://t.co/IHCRvIqbmc

[Ounka @OunkaOnX]

An anti-war ad from a decade ago is going viral. Because the same wars keep happening-for the same interests, at the same cost, with the same lies

[Aakash Gupta @aakashgupta]

Everyone’s missing the real story here.

Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses need human data annotators to train the AI. When you say “Hey Meta” and ask the glasses to analyze something, that video gets sent to Meta’s servers, then routed to Sama, a subcontractor in Nairobi, Kenya. Workers there manually label objects in your footage. They see everything you recorded, intentionally or not.

7 million pairs sold in 2025 alone. Every single pair generates training data that flows through human eyes in Kenya. Workers told Swedish journalists they see people undressing, using bathrooms, having sex, and accidentally filming bank card details. One worker said “we see everything, from living rooms to naked bodies.”

Meta’s automatic face anonymization is supposed to protect people in the footage. Workers say it fails in certain lighting. Faces that should be blurred are sometimes fully visible. The person you recorded without knowing? A stranger in Nairobi can identify them.

Buried in Meta’s terms of service is one sentence doing enormous legal work: the company reserves the right to conduct “manual (human) review” of your AI interactions. That’s the legal cover for routing intimate footage from Western homes to a $2/hour labor force operating under NDAs, office surveillance cameras, and a strict no-questions policy. Workers say if you raise concerns about what you’re seeing, you’re fired.

This is the same company, Sama, that TIME exposed in 2023 for paying Kenyan workers $2/hour to label graphic content for OpenAI while being billed at $12.50/hour per worker. Workers described the experience as torture. Sama ended that contract, then pivoted to labeling Meta’s glasses footage. Same workforce. Same rates.

Meta markets these glasses as “designed with your privacy in mind.” The privacy design is a tiny LED light on the frame that most people don’t notice. The data pipeline behind it routes your bedroom footage to a contractor with a documented history of worker exploitation, failed anonymization, and union-busting lawsuits.

And the next generation of these glasses? Meta is planning to add facial recognition. The same system that can’t reliably blur faces in training data wants to start identifying them on purpose.

The LED light on the frame is doing about as much for your privacy as the terms of service nobody reads.