patternpulse

AI phenomenology - user research, policy + comms

[patternpulse @patternpulseai]

⭐️🤖 coming up June 25 from @MktgAi - register for this free virtual event!

[B2B News Network @B2BNewsNetwork]

⭐️ AI isn't coming to #B2B marketing.

It's already here.

Join thousands of your peers and learn what's working, what's changing, and what's
next.

🗓June 25 | AI for B2B Marketers Summit - register for this free online event

https://t.co/1uyDXhTWZI

#sponsored

[nature @Nature]

Evidence suggests that AI-driven ‘deskilling’ is starting to happen in medicine, computer science and other fields

https://t.co/0xCHVAroP4

[jennifer evans 🇵🇸🇱🇧🇨🇦 @nejsnave]

I've been working on this paper since March and I'm still a bit stuck on it and haven't finished the research (damn you sovereignty!) but ...

I saw something on here today that made me realize it's time to put it out there and see what the response is. https://t.co/mIIGIaYSfq

[Nav Toor @heynavtoor]

Researchers analyzed 14 million academic papers published between 2010 and 2024. They tracked every word. They found that ChatGPT is rewriting the English language.

Not metaphorically. Literally.

After ChatGPT launched in November 2022, certain words that had been stable in academic writing for over a decade suddenly exploded in frequency. The researchers at the University of Tübingen and Northwestern University mapped every excess word and categorized them.

The words are ones you already recognize.

"Delve." "Intricate." "Meticulous." "Commendable." "Underscore." "Pivotal." "Nuanced." "Landscape." "Comprehensive." "Multifaceted." "Showcasing." "Groundbreaking." "Innovative." "Invaluable."

329 excess style words appeared in early 2024 that were not there before. The spike is unprecedented in the history of the dataset.

Here is what makes this different from every other vocabulary shift ever recorded. During COVID, excess words also appeared. Up to 188 of them in 2021. But those were content words. "Respiratory." "Remdesivir." "Ventilator." Words that described a new reality.

After ChatGPT, the excess words are not content words. They are style words. Not what people write about. How people write. The subject matter did not change. The voice did.

The researchers estimate that at least 10% of all academic papers published in 2024 were processed with ChatGPT. Not written entirely by AI. Processed. Edited. Polished. Run through the model and published with its fingerprints still on the page.

You have seen these words everywhere. In emails. In LinkedIn posts. In articles. In cover letters. In reports your colleagues sent you. You could not explain why everything started sounding the same. Now you can. The entire internet passed through the same model. And the model left the same fingerprints on everything it touched.

The researchers proved something else. The contamination is not slowing down. The number of excess words grew from 188 during COVID to 329 after ChatGPT. The curve is still climbing.

ChatGPT did not just change what we can do with language. It changed the language itself. One model. One voice. Fourteen million papers. And a vocabulary shift larger than a global pandemic.

[patternpulse @patternpulseai]

The hilarious thing is this isn't even #AI. It's the stuff that makes AI actually functional and it's a lot of work.

[darkzodchi @zodchiii]

NVIDIA CEO, Jensen Huang:

"Nobody writes prompts anymore. The new job is to write and handle loops."

He calls it the shift that defines the rest of 2026.

Interview was out just yesterday.

Watch the 23 minute talk, then save the full framework below👇

[patternpulse @patternpulseai]

and (OK it's not exactly a linear relationship, but it is foundational) the error rate on AI overviews is just astronomical. already produced its first legal ruling (Germany) + likely more to come. It's not really sustainable.

There doesn't seem to be a strategy here.

[leo 🐾 @synthwavedd]

🚨 SCOOP: After the release of Fable 5 and with GPT-5.6 looming, the mood behind the scenes at Google DeepMind is increasingly one of frustration and broad discontent over the lab's perceived fall into a distant third—or even fourth—place.

"I can't blame Noam [Shazeer] for walking. He won't be the last big name to go, either," a well-connected DeepMind employee told me.

DeepMind's last major model release, 3.5 Flash, was a significant jump over its predecessor; however, it was not meaningfully better in most cases than 3.1 Pro, released back in February. In real-world use, it remains several steps behind the frontier. That was four months ago, and Google's best model now sits in a lowly fifth place on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index—lapped by models from Anthropic, OpenAI, and now China's Zhipu AI. Other releases have proven similarly disheartening: the small video generation model Gemini Omni Flash launched to little fanfare and was easily beaten by ByteDance's Seedance 2.

Gemini 3.5 Pro, slated to launch June 30th, is "not the step change we need to be truly competitive in the race [to AGI]," per another individual at the company. The consensus seems to be that leadership at Google has all but conceded that race to Anthropic and OpenAI, and that "only a big shake-up" will propel them back to the highs of mid-to-late 2025.

But employees are not hopeful: "We no longer have a frontier model in text, image, video, voice, or even vision... if we can't release a real frontier model after over four months of work with all of these resources, what are we doing?"

[The Other Alistair @TotherAlistair]

ow that hits hard

[Amy Diehl, Ph.D. @amydiehl]

AI was supposed to alleviate people’s workload, but instead AI agents are like a needy toddler: "endless follow-up questions, require detailed instructions—and, if you leave them unsupervised, are liable to make a huge mess."
https://t.co/uYrYIfG7Gw

[B2B News Network @B2BNewsNetwork]

⭐️🤖 NEW: Triangulated Sovereignty: Three Tests Canada’s AI Stack Must Pass https://t.co/oOBcHQ7drZ via @B2BNewsNetwork

[patternpulse @patternpulseai]

⚖️

[Luiza Jarovsky, PhD @LuizaJarovsky]

Who is suing whom in AI, by @mccandelish

[Broadbent Institute @broadbent]

How do we make digital sovereignty and public, democratically-controlled AI for the public good into real nation-building initiatives?

Join the Broadbent Institute & Rumbo Colectivo for a public discussion on AI and Digital Sovereignty at @arts_tmu.

🔗 https://t.co/S1KVucO4hP

[jennifer evans 🇵🇸🇱🇧🇨🇦 @nejsnave]

⭐️🤖 Coming up from @patternpulseai : a look at #AI sovereignty through NATO with Laszlo Lakatos-Hayward, and the convergence of AI in military, defense and trade negotiations and sovereignty lenses,

Plus the implications of potential EU participation and software deals with EU companies that significantly increase governance and privacy requirements,

potentially in conflict with proposed Canadian legislation on social media and data retention.

[Glenn Tunes @glenn_tunes]

EVERY COUNTRY HERE IN EUROPE SHOULD DO THE SAME ✊✊✊✊✊✊✊✊✊✊✊✊

[jennifer evans 🇵🇸🇱🇧🇨🇦 @nejsnave]

Reality: a basic fact the bubble purveyors ignore is that a great deal of the spend is on development, new model training and innovation. By simply slowing down model releases, the frontier model compan(ies) could cut a significant amount of costs.

This is a challenge in this extremely competitive environment, but it certainly does not mean that companies could not be profitable if they want to be.

I'm not sure profitability is the objective.

[etn. @etnshow]

BREAKING: Anthropic’s Dario Amodei, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, DeepMind’s Demis Hassabis and Mistral’s Arthur Mensch will meet for a 2-hour lunch today, per politico.

[Alasdair Phillips-Robins @alasdairpr]

We've got the full text of the Lutnick letter. Anthropic may well want to resolve this out of court, but the letter is legally deeply flawed:

1. There's no "export" here to restrict. The letter relies on EAR § 744.22, which allows BIS to restrict the export of "items" if there's an unacceptable risk they'll be used by adversary military or intelligence services. But Anthropic provides software-, or AI-, as-a-service, and services are not covered by export controls. Congress has considered adding remote access provisions that would cover digital services—the House passed a bill doing this in January—but these proposals are not yet law, and the current definitions of "item," "software," and "technology" in the statute (50 USC § 4801) and regulations (EAR § 772.1) do not cover services.

2. This restriction is geographically much broader than the underlying law allows. Section 744.22 applies to military and intelligence activities of a list of specific countries, include China and Russia. But the letter imposes worldwide restrictions. It's not clear how allowing nationals of close allies access to Mythos/Fable enables Chinese or Russian military or intelligence activity. G7 governments have asked for their access to be restored; under this law, it should be.

3. There are serious First Amendment problems. It's murky legal territory what 1A rights a developer has in its models, but US residents (even non-citizens) have 1A rights to receive information, which are likely being violated by the shutoff. Any speech restriction has to be narrowly tailored to the governmental interest. This is likely overbroad, in part because it covers citizens of countries not listed in the law.

4. In fact, the letter is so badly drafted it might not restrict API/chatbot access at all. It bars the export, reexport, and transfer of "Anthropic’s Claude Mythos 5 Model and Claude Fable 5 Model." The "model" in common parlance means the model weights, or perhaps the weights and the associated code and environment. As long as the weights are on a U.S. server, virtual access to the model through a structured interface doesn't "export" or "transfer" the model anywhere. Only information—queries and outputs—is transferred, not "the model." Anthropic may have over complied to show good faith, but it's not clear this order truly required shutting off model access.

Stepping back, the administration reportedly believes there are serious security vulnerabilities created by the reported jailbreak and Anthropic hasn't done enough to address them. That may be true, we can't tell for sure from the outside. But the export control laws are not a roving license to ban unsafe products or punish companies the White House thinks are irresponsible. If the administration fears dangerous AI models, it should work with Congress to write laws to govern them.

[jennifer evans 🇵🇸🇱🇧🇨🇦 @nejsnave]

⭐️🤖 NEW: The spate of new federal bills up for debate currently in Canada (and not just in Canada) has potentially wide reaching impact that goes beyond the domestic impact and dialogue. "Canada is Building Power Over Speech While Surrendering #Sovereignty" https://t.co/CY7R7OEMNA a late night read on @B2BNewsNetwork

[jennifer evans 🇵🇸🇱🇧🇨🇦 @nejsnave]

Just when I thought I was actually going to get some sleep tonight, the Tapscotts drop the 200 plus page extremely Tapscott roadmap for the AI future of Canada

which includes A LOT of agentic 👀

so now of course I'm going have to read digest and comment on this ... irreconcilable sleep schedule and AI policy curiosity ... https://t.co/kDaPEJho94

[patternpulse @patternpulseai]

NEW: Privacy Legislation Is Pointless If It Does Not Handle Convergence https://t.co/DALNadCLXO via @B2BNewsNetwork

[CTV News @CTVNews]

Courts cracking down on error-strewn AI-assisted legal briefs https://t.co/TtgaxYdxQh